The debunked god of war?

176
The debunked god of war?

Now we will think about what we talked about recently within the walls and halls of the DSEI exhibition. DSEI (Defense Security and Equipment International Exhibition and Conference) is an international arms exhibition and fair, which has been held in London every 1999 years since 2. Unlike the International Arms Exhibition in Paris "Eurosatory", DSEI as an alternative is held in odd years.

At this exhibition, not only manufacturing companies boast about who came up with what is deadly, but also various military experts give presentations. And this is an equally important component of the exhibition, because often, on the basis of some research, development of a new weapons, as well as modernization of existing ones. Well, a discussion of tactics of use, which will be the subject of today’s proceedings.



DSEI London typically hosts multiple panels for talks and discussions spread across exhibition halls across six separate forums.

On one of the days of the exhibition, September 14, an event occurred that interests us: a report "Lessons Learned from Ukraine: Does Artillery Win Wars?".

Even if military analysts from NATO countries had taken part in the discussion, it would have been informative and interesting, but the presence of Lieutenant Colonel Yuri Patskan, an officer in the Main Directorate of Missile Forces, Artillery and Unmanned Systems of the General Staff of the Armed Forces of Ukraine, made it even more interesting.

Artillery officers spoke. Brigadier Neil Budd from the British Army and Colonel Cyril Jordanov from the French Army, as well as presenter Nick Elliott, chairman of British artificial intelligence company Helsing and a former British Army engineer.

They say that during the report and co-reports there were no empty seats left in the hall.

At the very beginning, Elliott reminded the audience how on April 17, 1940, in the Kremlin, senior commanders of the Red Army discussed the experience of the recently ended war against Finland. At the end, Stalin personally spoke, who in his speech said that “In modern war, artillery is God.”

Well, if the British royal engineer said so... In general, some sources indicate that Stalin only repeated an expression that was uttered two centuries before by the French general of the Napoleonic army, Jean-Baptiste de Gribeauval. But de Gribeauval doesn’t care, and we are pleased with the respect from the enemy. I think no one doubts that Britain is our enemy today.

Elliott's report consisted of several theses.

In the first, he praised 155mm artillery, which has become a lifeline for Ukraine, calling 155mm shells “the royal currency.”

The second thesis was devoted specifically to the question of how artillery is a decisive factor in a military conflict.

Stalin actually called artillery the “god of war.” And he was right, because the massive use of a large number of cannon artillery gave the side using a certain and even decisive advantage. But more than 80 years have passed since then and much has already changed in the world.


Mass bombardment may no longer be the most important aspect of artillery use.

“The ability to be fast, accurate and efficient outweighs sheer numerical superiority. ... And this pace is enabled by technology, software, new ways of integrating assets and information, artificial intelligence. When it comes to today's artillery, it is no longer the big eating the small, but the fast eating the slow,” Elliott said.


It's very difficult to argue with this. Indeed, the advent of counter-battery radars, which calculate the coordinates of artillery batteries in very short periods of time, moved shooting to a slightly different plane, different from the classical one.

Loitering ammunition, and with them ordinary flying bombs from civilians drones became a means of instant response to detection. Well, the appearance of the Haymars and Iskanders on the battlefield made the confident suppression of the batteries a matter of minutes.


And here we have not yet a word about aviation, which, in theory, was supposed to become the main enemy of artillery.

“With neither Russia nor Ukraine achieving air superiority, the war has come down to two armies hitting each other with artillery,” Elliott said.

The statistics that Lieutenant Colonel Patskan shared with the audience confirmed this: 90 percent of Ukraine’s losses in the war with Russia in the first year were from artillery.


And another data was voiced by the Ukrainian military: at the beginning of hostilities on the territory of Ukraine in 2014, the time from identifying a target to delivering an artillery strike on it was about 15 minutes. Thanks to spotter drones, counter-battery radars, modern communications and new command and control software, the Ukrainian army has now reduced this time to about four to five minutes, Patskan said.

The British side, having assimilated the information, began to think hard. Well, or pretend that he is actively working with data, because Brigadier General Neil Budd, commander of the 1st Shock Deep Reconnaissance Brigade, said: “We are clearly studying what is happening in Ukraine at the moment.”

The Deep Reconnaissance Strike Brigade Combat Team was formed in July 2022 and is a unique combination of ground reconnaissance, surveillance, targeting and artillery, "all combined into one brigade for the first time," he said.

There is little doubt that the British are good fighters. Yes, the British army... is somewhat conservative, but they work even with this. As for innovations, this is in order, at least when it comes to tactics.

Budd noted that the British Army is currently working very actively to increase the speed of the data processing and decision-making system. The main goal is to make the data collection system more efficient, including through artificial intelligence with an ever-increasing share of process automation.

"Fewer boundaries between the sensor, the decision-making commander and the shooter"

The general is right and yes, the practice of the Northern Military District confirms this. The passage of approvals has already become the talk of the town on the other side of the front, but the Armed Forces of Ukraine openly boast that NATO instructors, having created their control system using modern communications, have allowed them to reduce the level of decision-making. And now the battery commander, who will have all the necessary data for this, can make a decision on a fire attack on the enemy.

Colonel Cyril Jordanov, head of the artillery department of the French Army Command, chose to quote Napoleon, who said: "God is on the side of the best artillery".

Nevertheless, Iordanov’s opinion was as follows:
“I don't believe you will win the war with artillery. You win a war with a better strategy, a better military-industrial complex and a strong morale among the population."


Well, from a strategic point of view, the French colonel is absolutely right. Still, artillery is essential to tactical success: The key for artillery now is command and control, Yordanov said, echoing the sentiments of other panelists.

What is stopping the artilleryman today?


According to Patskan, the two main problems Ukraine faces with its artillery are superior Russian electronic warfare capabilities, which help detect Ukrainian units, and loitering munitions, which destroy them. Thus, the ability to quickly aim artillery, shoot at a target, and then move to another location to avoid retaliation becomes increasingly important.

If you look back at the year 2022, when the next Eurosatory exhibition was held in Paris, several European weapons manufacturers presented the so-called “shoot and scoot” systems - small tactical wheeled vehicles equipped with mortars that allowed just two team members to deploy the mortar, aim it, fire it, and then pack it up and leave within minutes.


This is a real response to real changes in the situation on the battlefield. ISIS mobile mortar crews have demonstrated their effectiveness back in Syria, causing many problems for the Syrian army, and not only it.

General Budd concluded that on modern battlefields it is becoming more and more difficult to hide from the enemy, making the mobility, maneuverability and speed of deployment of artillery systems so much more vital that they surpass in importance such parameters as range and destructiveness of the charge.

Yes, it turns out that now the god of war must “shoot and run.” Alas, Budd and Iordanov together admitted that if you stay in place, you could die. And when it came to command posts, both spoke on the topic that a modern command post is generally the primary target for the enemy.

The war in Ukraine is prompting armies to rethink artillery and its use.


Moreover, everything happened in just 14-15 months. Literally at the very beginning, the earth trembled from the Russian “Shaft of Fire,” which instilled fear not only in the Ukrainians, but also in their assistants. But that’s what assistants are for, to help. And by the time of the capture of Bakhmut, the situation had changed almost radically: there was no talk of any mass shooting by divisions and regiments at all. And they also stopped mentioning any lengthy processing of the front edge or fortified area.

And at one time, the videos on the other side, from the Ukrainian Armed Forces soldiers pressing into the ground, swearing at the artillery, the work of which shook everything above and below the ground - they did a good job of raising the general mood.

And it was all over.

And it's not a lack of shells. Yes, there were problems with supplies, but the shelling of Ukrainian positions with artillery was stopped for a completely different reason. It simply became impossible to do it the same way as at the beginning of the Northern Military District, when the barrels threw out thousands of shells a day, mixing everything with the ground and drawing rather terrible landscapes.


Simply, after 4-5 shots, the positions were revealed, the coordinates were calculated and the Highmars flew there. As it turned out in practice, the weapon is very accurate and fast. And the artillery simply did not have the opportunity to stand in positions and fire for hours. The time of the artillery attack began to be calculated in minutes.

We had an article from the artillerymen from Gvozdik.


Entering the position – aiming – one sighting – adjustment – ​​3-5 rounds of rapid fire – leaving the position. All about everything in no more than 7 minutes. Delay is really like death, because in the best case, shells will arrive from the same artillerymen from the other side. At worst - a "Hymars" or a drone with an explosive charge, a thing even more terrible in its accuracy than the "Hymars".

As a result, the times when batteries could iron out the enemy for hours, firing hundreds and thousands of shells, have in fact sunk into history. history. Pointed injections with a sword replaced the long beating with a club. And another important aspect became clear: it is more profitable to stab with a sword if you are a winner. From an economic point of view.

Let's remember Bakhmut. How many shells were spent to capture this city? These shots could not leave anyone indifferent, since the name of what was happening there was HELL.


The result?

The end result is just empty space and ruins.




In fact, you can forget about the city of Bakhmut/Artemovsk, because it was simply wiped off the face of the earth. There is no point in blaming anyone for this, because both sides tried their best. The question is what the further value of this “acquisition” can be left open, since such a destroyed city is not a value, but quite the opposite.

Observing everything that is happening, the British are drawing the right conclusions. In favor of high-precision weapons, and if not high-precision, then highly mobile.

“When you talk about artillery, you immediately think of a howitzer because that’s what everyone thinks of. Actually, we are talking about an artillery system. And if we don't invest in every part of the artillery system, from the sensor to the commander to the weapon, then we are essentially fighting with one hand behind our back."
, — Budd.

Indeed, long-term untargeted shelling, the result of which was “lunar landscapes”, and not a destroyed enemy, is already history. There, in NATO, they understand this very well. And since they are doing quite well with high-precision weapons, apparently we should expect the appearance of light and medium highly mobile systems.

An 80-120 mm mortar based on an all-terrain vehicle - this option has been in operation for a long time, since ready-made samples are shown at exhibitions. Obviously, it’s up to light artillery systems based on off-road trucks or high-speed tracked vehicles that can effectively deliver 100-120 mm guns to positions. Why is that? They are lighter and therefore more mobile.

A very interesting tactical situation has developed in the Northern Military District, which experts from different countries cannot ignore.

Aviation, if it operates, does so exclusively in the front-line zone, since air defense systems simply do not allow it to go further.

Air defense systems cannot be located near the front line, since they are being targeted drones and anti-radar missiles from aircraft.

Artillery cannot work actively for a long time, since MLRS, OTRK and all the same drones are starting to work on it. Drones have actually replaced aviation in this regard.

The MLRS and OTRK systems are doing quite well. Mainly because they don't need much time to prepare and fire.


The drone, His Highness the drone, is today a more lethal weapon than a howitzer. Yes, it doesn't fly that far. But it carries almost the same amount of explosives, and we’re not even talking about accuracy. The accuracy of a kamikaze drone in the front-line area surpasses even guided missiles. Well, the UAV costs much less than the Excalibur or Krasnopol.

True, there is also a government for drones, we talked about this recently. And the Ukrainian military, oddly enough, agrees with our point of view. And at the forum, Lieutenant Colonel Patskan of the Armed Forces of Ukraine stated that one of the urgent needs of Ukraine from industry is acoustic detectors that can determine the location of enemy artillery batteries in areas where Russia has reliable electronic warfare systems. And there are many electronic warfare systems, so in the counteraction zone, the Ukrainian military would still like to have at least something that could give an advantage over the Russian army.

In addition, Patskan also dreamed of drones that would be more resistant to interference from our side.

Total


Artillery has lost the field of modern battle to counter-battery systems. These are radars, drones and other sensors in combination with artillery barrels, OTRK, MLRS and UAVs. Detection, suppression and destruction of an artillery battery in modern combat is a matter of a few minutes.

Now artillerymen from many countries will have to rack their brains to develop new tactics for using artillery on the battlefield in modern conditions. And yes, perhaps new types of weapons will appear.

However, this does not yet write off howitzers and cannons and does not retire them. In less technologically advanced conflicts, the artillery shell will continue to play a very, very significant role. But, let me emphasize, this is when rebels in Africa will fight against governments or terrorists in the Middle East against countries in the region. In conflicts in more developed countries, artillery will have much less weight.

And yes, you will definitely have to forget about the useless transfer of shells (even very cheap ones) in the “shoot there before lunch” style. But this is the normal course of history.
176 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +28
    20 December 2023 04: 34
    A chaotic article, after wading through the words it becomes clear only that it is not advisable to fire artillery from a standstill for a long time. But almost nothing is said about the importance of reconnaissance and accurate and timely target designation.
    1. +4
      20 December 2023 05: 00
      Quote: Vladimir_2U
      But almost nothing is said about the importance of reconnaissance and accurate and timely target designation.
      recourse Don't you know this? But it is said about the importance of reducing the steps of transferring the decision to the blow and reducing the level of making this decision. feel
      1. -1
        20 December 2023 08: 02
        Quote: Mavrikiy
        about the importance of reducing the steps of transferring the decision to impact and reducing the level of making this decision

        And a concomitant increase in the level of friendly casualties
        1. +3
          20 December 2023 09: 39
          NATO has solved this problem through satellite Internet and the ability to broadcast images from drones online.
          1. +3
            20 December 2023 19: 10
            I just have one question: in the event of a big mess, will the satellites fly or not and how will the Starlinks live there? I’m not infantry and I’m not special in artillery matters, but the question nevertheless has the right to be,
            1. 0
              21 December 2023 01: 26
              It’s quite funny here that in the USA the companies that create satellite constellations, including radar constellations, Starlink, Maksar are purely private) And our Marathon and 1440 are sort of space PMCs) If it comes down to it, then it’s not up to Starlinks....
            2. 0
              22 December 2023 21: 37
              I just have one question: in the event of a big mess, will the satellites fly or not and how will the Starlinks live there?

              What will happen to them? The same Starlink hovers at an altitude of 150-200 km. What difference does it make to him at such a distance from atomic explosions on Earth. Many satellites cluster at altitudes of thousands of kilometers. No matter how hard they try, nothing will reach them.
        2. +12
          20 December 2023 09: 41
          What squalor! All these issues were considered and analyzed at the end of the 20th century. There is no SVO experience. Imagine that you want to pull teeth through your butt and use traditional tools to do this. Clearly they won't fit. And the author of the article goes there too. Does that mean they are bad? This is about the SVO and conclusions from it...And NATO members play along with such “doctors”...
          For thinking and adequate people:
          https://russiancouncil.ru/analytics-and-comments/analytics/soedinennye-shtaty-na-puti-k-strategicheskoy-neuyazvimosti/
          In 1996, based on the concept of “network-centric warfare,” the Joint Chiefs of Staff prepared and published the Joint Vision 2010, which introduced a military “Full-Spectrum Dominance strategy.” Once again, the strategy implied achieving superiority in the battlespace from peacekeeping operations to the direct use of military force based on achieving information superiority.

          In addition to information systems, the concept of “network-centric wars” began to rely on the creation of advanced intelligence systems, military command and control systems and precision weapons.

          By the way, the General Staff of the Russian Armed Forces, in general, does not have any concept of modern war without nuclear weapons. They scurry from side to side and look for miracle weapons...and tell tales to you and the president. What are they doing there? Previously, you could have been shot for this! And cemeteries are growing every day.
          Our generals use WWII tactics and terrorist tactics, using mini UAVs against partisans in the trenches and draw deep conclusions about modern warfare. Is it possible for such “doctors” to achieve the goals of the SVO? NO !
          1. +3
            20 December 2023 17: 02
            Quote: Totvolk80
            What squalor! All these issues were considered and analyzed at the end of the 20th century. There is no SVO experience.

            Earlier. The concept of a “carousel” of firing platoons between several firing positions is from the 80s. Even then, the lifespan of a gun at an operational point in the event of a war with a technically comparable enemy was determined to be 5-7 minutes.
            And the RUK, which linked together the means of detection and destruction - this is also from the 80s.
            It was then that the struggle began for the reaction speed of artillery - from detection (by all means - aviation, UAVs, radar, RR and RTR) to the salvo, for the speed of generating data for firing, for the rate of fire of artillery units in the first few minutes, for the speed of the artillery unit's collapse, .
            It’s just that while the theory was getting to the hardware level, the Cold War ended - and budgets were sharply cut. But some things from the 80s did make it into the series - for example, the same PzH 2000.
            1. +4
              21 December 2023 09: 37
              Agree. All this has been worked out for a long time. In the nineties, at the military department they explained this to us.
              It feels like we really failed in knowledge for 40 years. And now we are using scraps of knowledge from a more developed lost civilization.
              Off topic, but there’s also some kind of déjà vu about gliding bombs: in 15, I remember reports from Syria, which said that we had worked out both the technical part and the tactics of using them. And now it's like a new thing again...
              1. +1
                21 December 2023 11: 30
                “It feels like we really failed in knowledge for 40 years. And now we are using scraps of knowledge from a more developed lost civilization.”
                these are not sensations, this is the most complete reality, unfortunately
          2. +1
            20 December 2023 19: 16
            All these issues were considered and analyzed at the end of the 20th century. There is no SVO experience.
            The question can be raised and considered at any time, but the answer to the question posed can be obtained during the practical application of the elements of the system, because "You cannot embrace the immensity."
            Moving on to the article, I think that a new type of weapon will emerge, let’s say - RSUR (guided missile system) from the modernization of the Smerch MLRS.
          3. +1
            20 December 2023 22: 29
            Much has changed: communications, the network-centric environment of the 90s is a completely different matter. And now the “budget” Starlink allows you to do much more.
    2. +5
      20 December 2023 08: 25
      A chaotic article, after wading through the words it becomes clear only that it is not advisable to fire artillery from a standstill for a long time. But almost nothing is said about the importance of reconnaissance and accurate and timely target designation.
      The author did not bother with a review of the complex of problems of this issue. As always.
    3. +2
      21 December 2023 08: 02
      Many things become clear, for example, why ours started making wheeled self-propelled guns. Remember the discussions here, in which as soon as the Moscow Region and Shoigu were not fired upon for this “unnecessary cutting”. It is also clear that our people understood this long before it was voiced in Britain and, at least, understand the topic no worse. But target designation is still a slightly different topic, albeit a close one.
      1. 0
        21 December 2023 10: 38
        Quote: puzoter
        Many things become clear, for example, why ours started making wheeled self-propelled guns. Remember the discussions here, in which as soon as the Moscow Region and Shoigu were not fired upon for this “unnecessary cutting”. It is also clear that our people understood this long before it was voiced in Britain and, at least, understand the topic no worse. But target designation is still a slightly different topic, albeit a close one.

        The problem with the wheeled Malva is that it does not have an automatic loader, which, in general, does NOTHING speed up the shooting. If you look at the Swedish archer, they simply installed a turret on a truck. They could have done something similar for Malva, but as always, the budget!!!
  2. +1
    20 December 2023 04: 55
    in the style of “shoot there before lunch” you will definitely have to forget.
    It was in the Northern Military District that new methods of combat emerged... Even tanks began to be used in new ways.
    1. +2
      20 December 2023 06: 23
      Quote from Uncle Lee
      It was in the Northern Military District that new combat techniques emerged

      Any war means new methods of combat. In the entire history of mankind there has never been a single war similar to one another...
    2. +2
      20 December 2023 07: 28
      Colonel Cyril Jordanov from the French Army

      What a mysterious person this is. I couldn’t find any data or even a mention of it anywhere on the Internet! Besides this article...
      1. 0
        21 December 2023 16: 18
        On the Russian Internet there is a mention of his service with the rank of colonel in the 93rd mountain artillery regiment (Vars-Allier-et-Risse, a suburb of Grenoble). But the author of the article obviously worked with foreign sources.
    3. +1
      20 December 2023 08: 06
      Quote: Uncle Lee
      It was in the Northern Military District that new methods of combat emerged... Even tanks began to be used in new ways.
      Exactly. For example, shooting from closed positions. fool
      1. 0
        20 December 2023 10: 09
        This tactical technique was developed at the end of the 20th century. And if you and others did not know about him, this does not mean that the North Military District gave birth to him. To fire from closed positions, external target designation and adjustable or guided projectiles are required. We have neither one nor the other. Adjustment using tables based on visual results is not external target designation. We shoot trains of ammunition across the fields. Is this a new tactic? All the photos are right on topic...
        The General Staff of the Russian Armed Forces does not even have a concept of tactical combat in modern conditions! There is no concept of using UAVs in this battle! What and how can they develop? What kind of UAVs if there is no concept for their use? What are you doing and why?
        1. +3
          21 December 2023 08: 05
          How do you know what the General Staff doesn’t have or has? Where does so much aplomb come from?
        2. +1
          21 December 2023 10: 24
          Quote: Totvolk80
          This tactical technique was developed at the end of the 20th century.

          Previously - in theory, even before the Second World War. In practice, in WWII, shooting T-34 with PDO was used in one of the selections. The main problems were the training of commanders and crews + the development of data for firing.
          If it was possible to plow the last gunners, then it was possible to work with the PDO even on tanks, even on assault self-propelled guns (near Berlin, a couple of ISU-152 regiments were involved in artillery preparation).
          Quote: Totvolk80
          To fire from closed positions, external target designation and adjustable or guided projectiles are required. We have neither one nor the other. Adjustment using tables based on visual results is not external target designation.

          In short, you need to bow to the artillerymen. And they will immediately ask, for example, about the binding of tank firing positions and the method of issuing data for firing. smile
          1. 0
            21 December 2023 10: 29
            Let's clarify right away. Shooting into the white light and hitting, or rather, destroying the enemy with 2-3 shots, preferably with one, from closed positions are completely different things.
            1. +1
              21 December 2023 10: 45
              Quote: Totvolk80
              Let's clarify right away. Shooting into the white light and hitting, or rather, destroying the enemy with 2-3 shots, preferably with one, from closed positions are completely different things.

              Then it's better to leave to Caesar - Caesar's tankers - tank, and artillerymen - artillery. Because if you load the tank with the “end part” of the artillery control system, then both the vehicles themselves and the crews for them will turn out to be “golden”. And the strength of tank units will swell from the inclusion of artillery “strapping” in them.
              The maximum possible for BTV in accurate shooting with PDO - this is shooting with TOURS with external target illumination.

              And yes, I would really like to see a tank firing with shells fired from the ground - because there are only 22 shots in the carousel. smile
              1. 0
                21 December 2023 11: 03
                Look. "Merkava" almost can. By the way, it’s a very advanced and best design suitable for modern warfare... There’s my comment about the new “Panther”. It's a pity that nothing can be said here....
              2. 0
                25 December 2023 08: 48
                If you watch the “Military Acceptance” video about the “Bakhcha” module for the BMP-3, it is clearly stated that the BMP-3 is equipped with everything necessary for mounted artillery fire. And the BMP itself was not even overloaded with such capabilities.
        3. +1
          21 December 2023 11: 36
          "Firing from closed positions requires external target designation and adjustable or guided projectiles"
          for shooting from closed positions you just need target coordinates and a competent spotter at the target location. that's all. and we have all this because it is elementary. why isn't it applied? another question, maybe they don’t know how to do it anymore
          1. 0
            21 December 2023 11: 43
            And how many of these spotters will be in captivity and in the cemetery? This is not WWII. Your views are very outdated, like those of the leaders of the Northern Military District! That's why the result is...
            By the way, do you have a new entry? I argued with you 3 years ago...
            1. 0
              21 December 2023 11: 50
              “And how many of these spotters will be in captivity and in the cemetery?”
              if we put only this consideration at the forefront, it means that they will shoot “in the wrong direction”, as they do now. shells in trains, missiles in thousands. and in order to avoid losses among spotters, it is necessary to train, use aviation, UAVs, satellites. There are methods, yes. there is just no desire. everyone is waiting for the blue helicopter laughing
              1. +1
                21 December 2023 11: 57
                There have long been other ways and possibilities. But in the upper echelon there are “stupid people” with backward views and they direct money to where they can earn more and for show and advertising their non-existent achievements.
                They have no other criteria.
      2. +2
        20 December 2023 19: 46
        "Exactly. For example, indirect shooting"
        tanks fired like this back in the Patriotic War, and as air defense weapons too
  3. +3
    20 December 2023 05: 18
    The army has always been known for rigidity and dogmatism in decision-making.
  4. KCA
    -8
    20 December 2023 05: 22
    Deploy a dozen batteries under the cover of Shells, Tors and electronic warfare, well?
    1. +1
      20 December 2023 10: 46
      Deploy a dozen batteries under the cover of Shells, Tors and electronic warfare, well?

      This will not help against a salvo from an enemy MLRS battery. Indeed, we need to think more carefully about more mobile self-propelled guns in the 120mm caliber, especially since there are developments of the “Vena” “Lotus” “Highlander” “Borse 82mm” Phlox. By the way, Vienna is already being used in the Northern Military District, I think the question of what to put into service with the Phlox will be resolved or Vienna, and even just putting “Cornflower” on a motorcycle league is not bad.
      1. +3
        20 December 2023 12: 03
        It would be more correct to say that at the battalion level there should be both towed mortars, self-propelled guns and even self-propelled guns. And as for “Vasilok”, simply putting it on “Motolyga” is not entirely correct. We need containers for quick supply of cassettes loaded with mines and racks for their transportation.
        That is, we need not just a Motolyga, something similar to the Phlox self-propelled joint stock company with boxes for ammunition.
        1. KCA
          0
          20 December 2023 13: 05
          "Vasilyok" turns around from the Urals very quickly, shoots 4-5 cassettes and leaves, no need to lift it, it will travel half a kilometer on a hitch, and more, as needed
          1. 0
            20 December 2023 14: 49
            The cornflower would be a cool option for turret placement, for example, on the BMP-1 instead of the vague 2A28. Especially if they modernized it in the image of NORINCO SM-4. There would be no price.
            1. 0
              20 December 2023 16: 55
              It remains only to remember that tower placement is impossible due to the abundant release of powder gases. The LShO-57, a low-ballistic weapon, has long been prepared to replace the Vasilka.
              1. +1
                20 December 2023 17: 14
                Gas contamination is really a problem if the tower module is not autonomous.

                Although you can do it as cheaply as possible, as for example they did on the BMP-1KZ⁠⁠
                1. +4
                  20 December 2023 17: 24
                  By definition, a turret module with a "Vasilk" cannot be autonomous, because this mortar is loaded by manually feeding cassettes.
                  But the BMP-1’s 2A28 gun is really indistinct. But this is the so-called afterthought, in hindsight we are all smart. It would have been better to make it based not on the 73 mm SPG-9, but on the 82 mm B-10 recoilless rifle. Make both for 82-mm mines and make a grenade with a powder propulsion engine, increase the barrel elevation angle. Even now, it is possible to list, well, simply, an incalculable number of wishes.
              2. +1
                20 December 2023 19: 26
                Quote: Sergey Alexandrovich
                It remains only to remember that tower placement is impossible due to the abundant release of powder gases

                You can implement placement in an open turret basket or directly on the roof behind the turret.
                1. +2
                  21 December 2023 09: 21
                  Already done, I really don’t know what loading method.
        2. +2
          21 December 2023 09: 31
          There is an interesting option based on MTLB-U
          1. +2
            21 December 2023 09: 37
            The design is indeed unusual, but the possibility of direct fire is lost. By and large, you can abandon “Vasilka” if you launch LShO-57. There, the mass of the grenade launcher itself is lower and turret placement is possible.
            1. 0
              21 December 2023 12: 58
              When it (LSHO-57) is brought to fruition, it will take 30 years, but there is Vasilek and an infantry fighting vehicle with an indistinct cannon, also in large quantities. Anything passable will be like a Ural with Cornflower in the back.
  5. +9
    20 December 2023 05: 30
    Whoever was buried on the pages of VO, now the time has come for artillery, although just a month ago there was an article that large-caliber artillery is being dragged. But there is no need to bury anyone, more and more the tactics of using various weapons resemble the game “Rock, Paper, Scissors,” and there is no favorite among them.
    1. -2
      20 December 2023 06: 10
      Quote from turembo
      Whoever was not buried on the pages of VO, now the time has come for artillery,
      Nobody buries artillery. Simply, one of the most important parameters of an artillery system is mobility.
      1. +6
        20 December 2023 06: 30
        Quote: Bad_gr
        Nobody buries artillery. Simply, one of the most important parameters of an artillery system is mobility.

        And accuracy.
        Mobility alone is of use - he quickly fired 7 shells “towards the enemy” and disappeared. The number of shells is no longer enough...
        And accuracy includes reconnaissance, guidance, and adjustability - that’s where the dog rummaged...
        1. +1
          21 December 2023 08: 11
          Why "to the side"? You write as if we don’t have reconnaissance and guidance in principle. In terms of quantity, the area affected by rapid fire will always be higher than a single projectile, even a controlled one.
  6. +12
    20 December 2023 05: 33
    90% of the defeats were inflicted by artillery, but artillery is outdated.
    1. +8
      20 December 2023 06: 12
      This is Skomorokhov’s signature handwriting - in one article he buried the “god of war” and immediately admitted that 90 percent of the Ukrainian Armed Forces’ losses were from artillery
      1. +1
        20 December 2023 06: 32
        Quote: Hanter
        This is Skomorokhov’s signature handwriting - in one article he buried the “god of war” and immediately admitted that 90 percent of the Ukrainian Armed Forces’ losses were from artillery

        In general, the article clearly states that the other day is not like just now.
        "Incineration" from now until lunch worked BEFORE "Hymarsov".
        1. 0
          20 December 2023 06: 45
          The “from now until lunch” principle did not work already in 2008. It has not worked since February 2022, this is written in the article. The conclusion needs to be drawn about the need to increase the mobility of artillery systems and not about the funeral of artillery
        2. +2
          20 December 2023 07: 59
          That is, 90% of the defeats were inflicted before the Highmars?
          1. +2
            21 December 2023 02: 45
            Quote: SVD68
            That is, 90% of the defeats were inflicted before the Highmars?

            A little more complicated, but in general - yes.
            There is no point in mobility if hitting an object requires a couple of hundred shells, but you can fire 7 during counter-battery combat. And while you are maneuvering, the target also does not stand still.
            About 90% in more detail... If there is no (for various reasons, fortifications, tactics) direct fire contact (with Kalash) - then where can there even be “defeats”?
            Whether artillery works well or poorly - all defeats will be from it and from bombs, by definition, because there is nothing else.
            If 90% of the cars we sell are Chinese, this does not at all indicate their outstanding qualities.
    2. -1
      21 December 2023 08: 14
      It is not outdated, but its usual implementation in the form of towed guns and tactics of use are outdated. And taking into account the colossal progress and the reduction in cost of homing heads, it will probably soon become fundamentally obsolete and give way to drones and MLRS.
    3. +1
      21 December 2023 11: 00
      One can agree that towed artillery is outdated, about the need for high artillery mobility. systems had just that.
  7. +4
    20 December 2023 06: 06
    The article has a big and bold “minus”. This is instead of comments.
  8. +7
    20 December 2023 06: 16
    Are we writing off again? Yes, a day ago the SPARKS were written off, now it’s art)). Maybe we shouldn’t write off and bring the concept of artillery systems and tactics of use to a modern form?
    1. +2
      20 December 2023 08: 03
      To come up with a concept and tactics, you need to think about it. But the author has problems with this. Grabbing writings from anywhere and making an article out of it is the new style of VO. Looks like I was stressed out on VO with competent authors
      1. +1
        20 December 2023 08: 23
        Looks like I'm stressed out on VO with competent authors

        They write too inconvenient and unpleasant things.
        1. +1
          20 December 2023 13: 35
          They don't write smart articles. They write about things they have absolutely no idea about. Literally six years ago there were normal, knowledgeable authors. And then just to write
          1. 0
            25 December 2023 08: 54
            What exactly doesn't suit you? The author’s main problems are outlined, perhaps so clearly and explicitly, but they are outlined.
            Ukrainian artillery remains the main enemy on the battlefield.
            This is clearly visible even from the materials of VO itself.
            https://topwar.ru/232993-v-zapadnoj-presse-razbirajut-boj-mezhdu-bmp-2-i-bradley-m2a2-ods.html
            Here you can clearly see how accurate the enemy’s artillery is, how quickly ammunition is selected and aimed. They are not even afraid of hurting their own people, they fire with cluster munitions so precisely at the very end of the plot.
  9. +1
    20 December 2023 06: 21
    The characters of the database during the Northern Military District and during the proposed war in (c) Europe (sing) will still be completely different - it’s like the Finnish war and the Second World War. How it will be in reality is almost impossible to imagine, but, for example, the use of nuclear (neutron) ammunition with a capacity of 0,1 -1 kT by canned artillery will practically eliminate the need for the deployment of batteries and prolonged fire exposure - no one will feel sorry for the population and cities of the enemy, as this happens in Ukraine, it won’t, and the possibility of intercepting such guns (unlike aircraft carriers) will be practically reduced to zero.
    1. +1
      20 December 2023 09: 29
      Nowadays, cases of destruction of 2s7 20 km from the front line are not uncommon.
      1. 0
        20 December 2023 09: 37
        Do you think they will have time to react to 1 shot? Yes, even if they succeed, there will be little sense in this.
        1. 0
          21 December 2023 01: 05
          I agree, you are right of course
  10. +3
    20 December 2023 07: 02
    The conclusion is clear: reconnaissance and target designation are the god of war.
    1. +1
      21 December 2023 08: 19
      God of war of the near future guided missiles for medium and long distances and drones for short and medium distances. Without them, target designation is enough for what is already available. Although target designation too, I agree
  11. +6
    20 December 2023 07: 45
    Detect, target, shoot, escape.

    For this to work, there needs to be a minimum amount of time between detecting a target and opening fire. The article says “lowering the level of decision-making” - IMHO, this is the main thing. That is, the problem is organizational, not technical. Reduce the number of decision-making links. The ideal option is for the scout to directly provide fire support coordinates. Not sure if this is possible.

    A historical example - at the initial stage of World War II, German dive bombers acted as “flying artillery” extremely effectively. One of the main reasons was an organizational decision - a ground commander at the level of a battalion commander (it seems, if not a company) directly, bypassing headquarters, contacted the aviation commander and directed aviation. Of course, there were also costs - cases of using “pieces” on a separate machine gun. But overall it worked.
    1. +6
      20 December 2023 08: 31
      There is no place to lower the level of decision-making; the regimental artillery is subordinate to the regimental commander. The battalion has its own means of destruction. The division solves its problems, and if the regiment needs reinforcement, it will support it. There are shortcomings in the quality of management, no one hides this, and they cannot be solved quickly, this is precisely a technical problem. The trouble is different, we have aviation like a money tree in the apartment of most Russians , it exists, but it doesn’t work. Aviation means reconnaissance and control of the enemy’s movements, and adjusting the fire of one’s own artillery and destroying someone else’s.
      1. +1
        20 December 2023 09: 26
        The question is whether manned aircraft are needed when there are UAVs
        1. +1
          21 December 2023 18: 18
          Each type of weapon has its own niche. At the moment, what an airplane can do, a UAV cannot... An airplane can carry a variety of ammunition, gliding bombs, adjustable bombs, free-fall bombs, and a lot at once. .UAVs as an addition to aviation, this is normal.
      2. +1
        20 December 2023 12: 05
        The target is noticed not by the regiment commander, but by a reconnaissance officer, perhaps not even an officer. While he reports to his commander, for example, the platoon commander, he reports to the company commander, then to the battalion commander... It takes a long time. Intelligence can generally be “seconded”; it has its own command.

        Aviation operates as much as enemy air defense allows.
        1. 0
          20 December 2023 15: 47
          This is in Russian artillery, where it is impossible to open fire on a target without a command from above, but in those units of the Armed Forces of Ukraine, the drone operator sits next to the battery commander and the latter sees both targets and arrivals in RT and corrects them on the fly. This has already been mentioned more than once as the reason for the loss in counter-battery combat by Russian artillerymen, whose decision-making cycle (OODA) is many times longer than that of the Ukrainians, and with equal opportunities, well, almost, guns, the result is natural.
          1. 0
            20 December 2023 15: 54
            Actually, I'm talking about the same thing. Decreased level of decision making.
            1. +2
              20 December 2023 22: 51
              Quote: S.Z.
              Decreased level of decision making.

              Lowering the level of decision-making depends on the awareness of the decision-maker.

              Imagine - an observer notices in the gray zone a group with armored vehicles heading to an unknown destination. Sends coordinates to the weapon. Can the gun open fire immediately? No, because the infantry does not have friend-or-foe sensors, someone must confirm that this is not our platoon sent, say, by the regiment commander to beat up the enemy’s neighboring support unit.

              It is necessary to increase the speed of information exchange and not just transfer powers down to those who simply do not have the necessary access.
              1. +2
                21 December 2023 07: 25
                Usually in different situations a decision is made in advance: not identified - one's own or not identified - someone else's. This depends on many factors and does not exclude friendly fire, but it is more effective than transmitting information through many authorities. Especially taking into account the fact that battles in the Northern Military District are carried out by very few groups and superiors often themselves do not know what kind of group of comrades came out of the forest 20 km away. from the one who has to make the decision.
                They usually know better locally.
        2. 0
          20 December 2023 16: 04
          I wrote that regimental artillery is subordinate and not under the direct command of the regimental commander. According to whose orders and for what purposes the artillery operates is determined in advance. This could be any of the commanders you listed. Targets for regimental artillery are usually in the line of sight.
    2. 0
      20 December 2023 12: 13
      Not sure that direct transmission of target coordinates for fire support is possible? But what about the practice of preparing a combat operation, when not only artillery is attached, but also an artillery spotter is assigned? Is this from the realm of the impossible?
      1. +1
        20 December 2023 12: 45
        When a detection and destruction operation is planned in advance, this is exactly what happens. However, often targets are discovered as a result of some other actions, for example, by a DRG, or by the head guard, or a camouflaged firing point is suddenly revealed at our column, but they do not have a spotter with them.
        1. -1
          20 December 2023 16: 14
          If a DRG or a camouflaged precision fire starts shooting, they are not looking for a spotter first, they are looking for cover.. Then they fire with everything they have at the enemy..
        2. 0
          25 December 2023 09: 00
          In modern conditions, a spotter is not always needed. It should be enough to plot on an electronic map the point where the enemy was detected, the nature of the target and the direction of movement if the target is mobile. The nearest artillerymen should immediately have this information appear on their electronic map. And then the choice of ammunition, automatic guidance and opening fire.
  12. +3
    20 December 2023 08: 21
    very active work on decreasing speed data processing and decision making systems.

    I would recommend the author to re-read this place again
  13. +2
    20 December 2023 08: 22
    I’m waiting for an article where the author will debunk the “queen of the fields”...)))
    Since he is one of those for whom “the glass is always half empty”
    1. +3
      20 December 2023 09: 55
      Quote: svp67
      Because he’s one of those people for whom “the glass is always half empty”

      Well, we are realists! wassat For us, the question of whether the glass is half empty or half full is not important, what matters to us is how many bottles are left! tongue
  14. +4
    20 December 2023 09: 12
    It seems that most commenters have not read the article or are unable to understand.
    1. Artillery remains the leading means of destruction.
    2. The techniques and methods of its application have changed.
    Now we need highly mobile artillery systems. With full automation, on wheels, with basic high accuracy, with a large range of guided projectiles.
    Example RCH-155. A fully autonomous combat module that can be installed on any suitable wheeled and tracked platform. It is possible, in principle, to remove a person from the machine and carry out control from another machine or a prepared point.
    1. +1
      21 December 2023 01: 18
      MLRS with guided projectiles, as an option, there is no problem with the service life of the barrels, and in principle, a second salvo is much fatter. And if the hail-p is made highly accurate, then camouflage and so on will be much easier.
  15. +3
    20 December 2023 09: 20
    It seems that barrel artillery is really everything, in addition to an expensive projectile with wings and an engine, the barrel life is also added, which for 52 caliber long-range ones is not so hot, and it’s impossible to throw cheap cast iron because drones have made the battlefield transparent... In this regard, high-precision long-range MLRS are more promising although drones are developing at such a speed...
  16. -2
    20 December 2023 09: 41
    However, the article indirectly contradicts information from the media and the Russian Ministry of Defense.
    Time will decide who is right...

    You can also remember from interviews with artillerymen here - the first 2 shells from worn out unheated barrels are flying to God knows where... they don’t seem to be oriented towards them at all. The sighting seems to be already the 3rd....
    1. +1
      23 December 2023 01: 18
      1 never start zeroing with two shells. And not according to the rules of shooting, and unnecessary

      2 are sighted with the main gun of the battery, the most unworn

      3 a correction is always made for the “extension of the charging chamber”

      4, warming up the barrel does not affect dispersion.

      5 in half the cases the third already start shooting to kill.
      1. +1
        24 December 2023 22: 21
        Thank you.
        Somehow, in an interview here, there was no such Artilleryman
  17. -3
    20 December 2023 10: 04
    The author admitted the mediocrity of our commanders. It is not the artillery’s fault that after 3-5 shots the Hymers fly, it is not the ability of our commanders to identify, find and destroy these Hymers. Our reconnaissance is "lame", not our artillery. And everything rests on the soldier’s feat.
  18. +2
    20 December 2023 10: 14
    When an army is led by specialists like these:
    From 1977 to 1978 - foreman of the Promkhimstroy trust (Krasnoyarsk); from 1978 to 1979 - foreman, head of the section of the trust "Tuvinstroy" (Kyzyl); from 1979 to 1984 - senior foreman, chief engineer, head of the construction department SU-82 of the Achinskalyuminstroy trust; from 1984 to 1985 - deputy manager of the Sayanalyuminstroy trust (Sayanogorsk); from 1985 to 1986 - manager of the Sayantyazhstroy trust (Abakan); from 1986 to 1988 - manager of the Abakanvagonstroy trust.

    From 1988 to 1989 - Second Secretary of the Abakan City Committee of the CPSU; from 1989 to 1990 - instructor of the Krasnoyarsk Regional Committee of the CPSU.

    In 1990 he moved to a new place of work - to Moscow. From 1990 to 1991 - Deputy Chairman of the RSFSR State Committee for Architecture and Construction.

    Then the artillery will be bad, and the aviation, and the armored vehicles...
    1. -1
      20 December 2023 19: 53
      "The following specialists are in charge:"
      for all his talents, he still doesn’t fire cannons and doesn’t provide target reconnaissance for batteries. he has slightly different responsibilities
      1. +1
        20 December 2023 20: 32
        "The following specialists are in charge:"
        for all his talents, he still doesn’t fire cannons and doesn’t provide target reconnaissance for batteries. he has slightly different responsibilities


        He built such a system in the army, where career advancement goes to those who are acceptable, not those who are worthy.
        1. -2
          20 December 2023 20: 46
          "when career growth goes to the agreeable, not the worthy."
          What is the connection between career growth and the ability to get where you want to go?
          1. +1
            20 December 2023 22: 35
            For example, this: a stupid general sends Orlans or quadcopters in bad weather, the equipment is lost. The stripe is hysterical, artillery without a UAV hits “somewhere there.”
            1. -1
              21 December 2023 08: 32
              "a stupid general sends Orlans or quadcopters in bad weather,"
              and a smart drone operator, in violation of all orders and instructions, carries it out. so, what?
          2. +4
            20 December 2023 22: 50
            What is the connection between career growth and the ability to get where you want to go?


            But no way. Those who make a career do not go to war. And those who fight go into the reserve as junior officers.
          3. -2
            21 December 2023 15: 31
            "how are career growth and skills related...."
            And you ask women with general ranks. Maybe they will tell you, or maybe...
    2. -3
      22 December 2023 01: 41
      but there was so much delight when he replaced Serdyukov - he was a genius - he raised the fire department from its knees - now the army will rise up... - after all, he built you a control center - and built a church - and organized tank biathlons - and all sorts of armies and sudden checks... - so what are you unhappy with now?
  19. +4
    20 December 2023 10: 17
    ...translation of shells (even very cheap ones

    Yeah... 40 rubles per piece....
  20. +3
    20 December 2023 10: 36
    No war has ever been won by just one branch or type of troops. War is a complex multi-level process of interaction of forces and means. When they talk about artillery as a “god,” we are talking about its power, and not about its significance on the battlefield. All so-called “counter-battery fighting” is just an ancient fight of sword and shield, which does not at all detract from the role and importance of artillery. And who said that an artillery battery consists only of artillery guns? Nobody forbids the introduction of means of protection and self-defense into its composition.
  21. +1
    20 December 2023 11: 38
    An article about the obvious.
    In my opinion, all further development of artillery can be summarized into five criteria:
    1. High mobility (Not only in movement, but also in deployment and collapse).
    2. High accuracy (Due to guided ammunition. 5 high-precision shots will take less time than 50 conventional ones. Less ammunition to carry, longer barrel life).
    3. High rate of fire (Less time in position. Automatic loader is required).
    4. High range (No comments needed).
    5. High reaction speed (the artillery unit’s own reconnaissance plus interaction with the reconnaissance of supported units, and the level of decision-making).
  22. +4
    20 December 2023 12: 25
    What kind of habit does Roman have of canceling everything? Artillery must become as mobile as possible and master new tactics of use. For example, shooting at a target from guns separated from each other by kilometers. One makes zeroing with the transfer of corrections to the other gun and changes position. The second gun, having entered these actual corrections into its calculated data (plus taking into account the difference with the first gun in the range to the target, the height of the place, the difference in the individual corrections of the gun and sight, etc.) strikes with rapid fire. This is schematic. The scheme requires high skill, reliable ADF channels and coordination of actions. But everything is quite achievable and greatly increases the survivability of even towed artillery. And this is just one of the schemes. But without reconnaissance, communications, adjustments, reliable APD and a revision of the decision-making system, nowhere
    1. 0
      20 December 2023 16: 35
      This, or something like this, is how the artillery fire control scheme of the Ukrainian Armed Forces works, not without the help and help of the West.. All data, air temperature, charge temperature and much more, for each gun, is on the battery command post, enter the target coordinates into the computer and transfer it to the calculations.
    2. 0
      21 December 2023 15: 23
      This will only prolong its agony, the duration of which is rapidly decreasing with progress in the development of homing heads for MLRS. Fortunately, there is no point in making new guns anymore, because when the resource of the existing ones is exhausted, in 10-20 years guns in any form will be something like trebuchets.
  23. +4
    20 December 2023 12: 31
    "Arta" is the most inexpensive way (except that a mortar is more budget-friendly) to throw something massive from point A to point B over a considerable distance.
    Yes, the days of its high accuracy are gone (missiles and UAVs are much more accurate), in the mass of impact it is inferior to MLRS, in the power of impact of OTRK and aviation, in mobility, in general, all of this.
    However, there was and will still be a plus for the art in the foreseeable future - this is a combination of budget, satisfactory accuracy and lethality. Probably, like any tool, it should be used mainly where these advantages can be realized to the maximum - strengthened areas should be left to more precessional means.
    1. -1
      20 December 2023 19: 56
      “Yes, the days of its high precision are gone.”
      why is this? the laws of geometry and ballistics have not been repealed, and all the accuracy of artillery rests only on them. well, adjustment accordingly
      1. 0
        20 December 2023 20: 14
        So everything is relative - and accuracy is also relative. If a VTO can fly straight into a window or a drone can fly directly into the roof of a tank, then the accuracy of classic art is no longer a good parameter.
        Here there is a full profile trench, equipped. +- 5 meters will not solve the problem, although the accuracy is not bad, but the problem will not be solved. But if we judge by countering offensive actions, then there is sufficient accuracy. About the adjustment, the author writes that over time it is difficult to adjust - and it will be even worse with this, especially in conflicts with more or less comparable parties with a developed industrial base.
        Other problems are really more effectively solved by WTO, that is, NOT by art in its classical sense.
        Of course, there is "Krasnopol", but this is no longer a classic artillery approach - there is an adjustment after the salvo.
        1. 0
          20 December 2023 20: 22
          "The accuracy of classical art is no longer a good parameter."
          When shooting at direct fire, accuracy depends only on the serviceability of the equipment and the training of the crew - they can hit everything they see, including the window. when shooting from closed positions, everything depends on reconnaissance of targets and adjustments. depending on where they are shooting - artillery gunners on the front line or aviation and rocket-propelled guns behind enemy lines
    2. 0
      21 December 2023 15: 28
      With the increasing effectiveness of anti-artillery reconnaissance and guided missiles, the cost of an artillery round will rapidly increase up to the cost of a weapon, which will be detected and destroyed after the first shot.
  24. 0
    20 December 2023 12: 33
    We need our own "Archers".
    With constantly working ultra-precise geolocation binding. So as not to waste precious minutes on topo-referencing before the shot.
    It is necessary to have high-speed data transmission and target designation channels.
    You need to have a high-speed Ballistic computer on it, combined with geolocation, so that you can obtain data about the target while moving and be practically ready to fire online. Stopped anywhere and extended the high-speed outriggers. In 10 seconds I pointed the barrel into a turn and an angle.
    And he started shooting.
    A high-speed automatic loader is needed. Allowing you to fire 10-12 shots per minute.
    With fire attack function.
    And an immediate departure from the position.
    Accordingly, from the moment of the first shot, before leaving the position - no more than 2 minutes.
    10-12 shots, and safe exit.
    We need high-precision flight control nozzles, instead of standard fuses.
    Such artillery will remain the god of war.
    1. +3
      20 December 2023 13: 45
      Why do you need a high-speed data transmission channel for target designation? To transmit the coordinates and type of target, the bandwidth of an ancient telephone modem is enough. Moreover, a telegraph channel with a speed of 50 baud may be sufficient. A high-bandwidth channel is needed to transmit images and control drones. These are, as it were, completely different tasks.
      1. -1
        20 December 2023 18: 24
        Quote: Sergey Alexandrovich
        Why do you need a high-speed data transmission channel for target designation? To transmit the coordinates and type of target, the bandwidth of an ancient telephone modem is enough. Moreover, a telegraph channel with a speed of 50 baud may be sufficient. A high-bandwidth channel is needed to transmit images and control drones. These are, as it were, completely different tasks.

        In order for any artillery installation to be network-centric.
        And she received all the information from all participants in the battlefield, and passed on her information as well.
        In real time.
        Enough with the mantras that no one needs network-centricity.
        Even the meager amount of NATO’s network-centricity, in a link, the detection of a target and a strike on the target by an ordinary self-propelled gun commander, without the involvement of headquarters, inflicted colossal losses on our artillerymen in a counter-battery war.
        1. 0
          20 December 2023 18: 35
          Your imagination has run wild. I’m not talking about network-centricity, but about the fact that communication channels can be different, right down to a field wire, which is not afraid of any electronic warfare equipment and Wifi in a dugout.
      2. 0
        20 December 2023 22: 43
        “Why do you need a high-speed data transmission channel for target designation?” you can ask the Ukrainians, because they have it (Starlink). When the “why do you need it” conversations begin, it is often all in favor of the poor and is explained by a banal lack of opportunity. Agree, “picture-in-picture” with a UAV in the cockpit of the same “Coalition” or “Tornado-G” would be nice?
        1. -1
          20 December 2023 22: 50
          ACS must ensure work with available communication channels. It is with those that are available, and not with those that you definitely want. It is possible to transmit an image, well, there is no way to be content with the coordinates and description of the target.
          In conditions of counteraction by enemy electronic warfare systems, channels with low throughput will be more stable.
    2. 0
      20 December 2023 20: 00
      "With constantly working ultra-precise geolocation reference. So as not to waste precious minutes on topographic reference before shot"
      Until she shoots, no one will see her. so there's no need to rush here. After shooting a series, you can hurry up. again, it’s unlikely that the enemy has the opportunity to react to every shot
  25. 0
    20 December 2023 12: 50
    Can you remember the experience of the Second World War, when 300mm RSs were launched from wooden guides?
    I placed it, aimed it, and launched everything using a radio command - and now let them shoot there as much as they can....
  26. BAI
    0
    20 December 2023 13: 26
    over reducing system speed data processing and decision making. The main goal is to make the data collection system more efficient including through artificial intelligence with an ever-increasing share of process automation.

    How is that? Zoom out to zoom in? Some kind of cognitive dissonance.
    And we will come to a simple and cheap solution - a disposable gun. The gun will also become consumable, like an FPV drone
  27. +1
    20 December 2023 13: 29
    And the artillery simply did not have the opportunity to stand in positions and fire for hours. The time of the artillery attack began to be calculated in minutes.

    The norm for MLRS is to change positions after a salvo. But there is no need to change the positions of towed artillery if there are good positions and means of warning. Hymerseys fly for several minutes at a long distance and if they are spotted in time, you can use cover and then resume shooting from the same position.
  28. +2
    20 December 2023 13: 49
    For some reason, many commentators are sure that modern artillery requires hit-and-run tactics. But at the same time, such an important property as massing the fire is lost. Which is one of the main conditions for breaking through the enemy’s defenses.
    Maybe it’s better to think about how to maintain the possibility of massing fire? For example, improve counter-battery warfare. For example, before a fire strike, launch kamikaze drones to reduce reaction time to counter-fire. Or increase the security of your guns. For example, self-digging with the installation of a roof from Drones. And unmanned self-propelled guns.
    1. +2
      20 December 2023 16: 05
      Massing fire is easier to implement with MLRS than with canned artillery - the fire density is higher, mobility is greater, modern MLRS such as Smerch or Hymers have a longer firing range and better accuracy.

      What you are talking about is possible with an overwhelming advantage, but there is none. That is, it is initially necessary to suppress all possible methods of return fire, but this is not yet possible. Including because a large number of different means of destruction of stationary devices have appeared - canned artillery, MLRS, including high-precision ones, OTR, aviation, drones...

      The firing range of many enemy guns is greater than that of cannon artillery. A battery of cannon artillery, firing for long minutes, is detected at a great distance in various ways and becomes a target.

      Even if the enemy is many times weaker, he has plenty of opportunities to hit such a target.
      1. 0
        20 December 2023 20: 05
        "modern MLRS such as Smerch or Hymers have a longer firing range and better accuracy"
        range, maybe, but not accuracy. RSZO is initially shooting in areas. and the gun, when used skillfully, can be as accurate as a sniper rifle, even from closed positions
        1. 0
          20 December 2023 20: 58
          The firing accuracy of MLRS will increase even faster for cannon artillery. If only because the cost of a rocket is higher than that of a projectile, and the correction module for it is somewhat easier to implement, since the overloads are initially lower.
          1. 0
            21 December 2023 08: 53
            “and the correction module for it is somewhat easier to implement”
            when firing direct fire, the best correction module is the gunner's eye. Direct fire missiles are not fired, except anti-tank missiles. when shooting from closed positions, it all depends on the adjustment at the target location. and the missile must be homing, and not according to the target coordinates embedded in its brain, which can change, but precisely according to the target itself, which again implies adjustment, or control, which significantly complicates and increases the cost of the “correction module”. and an artillery shell hits a scouted target without any problems; it is not affected by electronic warfare, weather conditions, uneven engine operation, air defense systems, etc. The main thing is to aim correctly. and, it is much cheaper, the target can be hit with a battery salvo, or ten shots from one gun, which significantly increases the chance of hitting the target
            1. 0
              21 December 2023 08: 55
              I may surprise you, missiles are also fired directly. The simplest example is an ATGM.
              1. 0
                21 December 2023 08: 59
                “I may surprise you, missiles are also fired directly. The simplest example is an ATGM.”
                Don’t surprise me, that’s what I said about it: “direct fire missiles don’t fire, except anti-tank rifles.”
                Before commenting, make sure you read what you are about to comment on
                1. 0
                  21 December 2023 09: 28
                  Then let me remind you that an RGP-7 shot is also a rocket, although it is called a grenade. The cumulative shot has a sustaining powder accelerator.
                  1. 0
                    21 December 2023 11: 03
                    "An RGP-7 shot is also a rocket, although it is called a grenade"
                    you probably mean rpg7? so it is also taken into account, since it is anti-tank laughing
      2. +1
        20 December 2023 20: 20
        No, MLRS cannot shoot at enemy positions for two hours. MLRS cannot accompany the advance with a barrage of fire.
        1. +1
          20 December 2023 20: 51
          "No, MLRS cannot shoot enemy positions for two hours"
          of course not. there won't be enough rockets for 2 hours
          "MLRS cannot accompany the advance with a barrage of fire."
          and who is advancing where in our country to accompany him with a “fiery wave”?
          We now fire 200 shells per hectare, and then slowly move forward, as part of a platoon or two
          1. -2
            21 December 2023 16: 17
            I don’t agree here - let’s remember the events on Damansky Island in 1969.....
            1500(!!!) Grad batteries were first bombed across the ice of the Amur River to prevent the Chinese from leaving, and then.....mixed with ice, water and blood by an almost 100-strong army......
            Only a few remained alive.....
            1. 0
              23 December 2023 10: 04
              “1500(!!!) Grad batteries were first bombed across the ice of the Amur River to prevent the Chinese from leaving, and then.....they mixed almost 100 troops with ice, water and blood......"
              did we have so many hailstorms then? especially in that place?
              and there were a little less Chinese, about 100 times laughing . otherwise any amount of hail would not help. no need to create myths
              1. +2
                23 December 2023 15: 44
                There was only one hail division there. 18 cars. As part of the artillery regiment of the defending division. By the way, the other two divisions had only 122 mm long M-30 howitzers.
            2. +2
              23 December 2023 10: 17
              "on the ice of the Amur to prevent the Chinese from leaving"
              a little wrong, the target of the hail was the T62 tank, knocked out by the Chinese, or rather, the super-secret sight on it. but it didn’t work out. the Chinese removed the sight before, and the tank is still standing in some museum
        2. +1
          23 December 2023 15: 41
          And most importantly, MLRS cannot fire defensive fire. Scattering is not the same, they hurt their own people. And the infantry really needs ZO when repelling every enemy attack.
      3. 0
        23 December 2023 15: 38
        .modern MLRS such as Smerch or Hymers have a longer firing range and better accuracy

        MLRS with less dispersion than barrel artillery? Just the opposite. By an order of magnitude
  29. 0
    20 December 2023 14: 07
    Quote from tsvetahaki
    the other day, not like just now.

    now
    1. 0
      20 December 2023 15: 52
      But now it’s not like before
  30. 0
    20 December 2023 16: 06
    “Well, the appearance of the Haymars and Iskanders on the battlefield made the confident suppression of batteries a matter of minutes”... let’s say, spending even one Iskander on a battery is too “fat”, and the battery will not stand in a compact heap.
    1. 0
      20 December 2023 17: 02
      I would like to remind you that the combat hour of an MLRS or OTRK missile can be cassette and cover a large area. And very often, even for a single gun and a large missile, it’s not a pity.
    2. 0
      20 December 2023 17: 15
      Iskander has a cassette warhead
      1. +1
        20 December 2023 18: 57
        Of course. But the covering area of ​​such a warhead is only about 15 m000 (moreover, it is oriented in a “strip” along the approach trajectory). At the same time, the “Guide to the Combat Operations of Artillery Fire Units” (2) prescribes placing MLRS and large-caliber guns at intervals of 2002-50 m, and guns with navigation equipment at intervals of 100 m or more. So, covering an entire battery with a single cluster warhead is only possible if the guns are arranged in a cluster, as in a training exercise, in order to take a spectacular photo for the report :)
    3. +1
      20 December 2023 20: 09
      "The Haymars and Iskanders made the confident suppression of batteries a matter of minutes"
      To confidently hit the battery, you need to know exactly where you are and where it is. coordinates, for example, accurate to the millimeter laughing . okay, okay, 50 meters will do too
  31. +3
    20 December 2023 16: 20
    This is when rebels in Africa will fight against governments or terrorists in the Middle East against countries in the region. In conflicts in more developed countries, artillery will have much less weight

    The author draws a conclusion directly opposite to the facts presented in the article. Let's remember Yugoslavia, how quickly the entire NATO coalition ran out of high-precision aircraft ammunition? And they didn’t risk a ground operation because they would have to come face to face with not the most advanced and numerous artillery. Now UKRAINE, + NATO, + Japan/RK/Australia (about 50 countries in total) cannot provide medium-intensity combat operations with precision-guided munitions. In the event of a nuclear conflict among “developed countries,” the infrastructure for the production of high-precision weapons will be destroyed first—and then no one will dare to challenge the throne of the “God of War.”
    1. -2
      20 December 2023 22: 24
      In the event of a nuclear conflict, no one will care who has how much было artillery.
  32. +2
    20 December 2023 17: 05
    Interesting article! But in any case, artillery showed great importance on the battlefield! Massive artillery shelling deprives any attacking side of maneuverability - this is the main discovery on the battlefield! But the military in the USA and NATO imagined the war in a completely different way, stubbornly relying on air superiority!
  33. +2
    20 December 2023 18: 26
    How good are Excaliburs? How many armored vehicles did they manage to destroy? There are no statistics on them at all!
  34. 0
    20 December 2023 18: 52
    you just need to be able to adapt to reality, question number 1: why do we need artillery? to cheaply hit various enemy targets, No. 2 why is artillery better than drones? it is not affected by electronic warfare and the projectile is cheaper than a spent drone, Ok! let's combine two systems, complementing one another, a kind of multicopter plus a 120 mm mortar, such a copter, for example, may not enter the electronic warfare coverage area before reaching the front edge of 5-7 km, and then land and fire several shots from a mortar while on the ground from a stable position position then rise and fly away to reload, such copters in terms of accuracy and cost of a shot will be comparable to mortars; it will not be possible to get them with drones and high-mars, returning to base such a drone can again reload the mortar and again fly to the position to fire a shot....
    1. +1
      20 December 2023 20: 46
      Quote: Max1984
      let's combine two systems, complementing one with the other, a kind of multicopter plus a 120 mm mortar

      And you get a ganship - a certain variation of it. It’s just that it can be crammed into at least the weight and size of a light helicopter.
      1. 0
        20 December 2023 21: 53
        no, a gunship is a flying cannon, and I propose one that fires from the ground, but instead of a classic chassis - a drone, the advantage is the ability to shoot from a stable position, which means high accuracy and ease of targeting, unlike equipment in the air, and at the same time speed and mobility aviation, what is bad about a classic self-propelled gun? Yes, it can quickly leave a position, but where will it go? the drone will quickly catch up with it, since there are few route options on the ground and the speed is low, but a flying gun, howitzer, mortar, is free in three dimensions and is not inferior in speed to drones, it flew in - landed - fired - flew away, try this and figure out what it should do can be as close as possible to the LBS, which achieves high accuracy even with conventional unguided projectiles....
        1. +1
          20 December 2023 22: 12
          The problem there is that such a device will be caught up by an air-to-air missile. This device will be expensive and not widespread.
          1. 0
            21 December 2023 00: 18
            the missile will catch up with the air, you just need a plane with such a missile in close proximity, aviation is now trying to stay away so as not to be shot down, helicopters fly up to the LBS and fire with NURS from the nose up, the accuracy is about zero, but here the device will fly up and land , will fire a few shots, take off again and go to hell, as for the price of the device, this is the price of a regular drone capable of lifting, say, a 120 mm mortar and plus the guidance system of this mortar, the design can be simplified by using a recoilless rifle instead of a mortar, such a unit will be much lighter and he will have no return....
  35. +2
    20 December 2023 22: 09
    The experience of the SVO? And what has the experience of the SVO shown? And who or what strategist will tell you what war will be like in the future? I don’t agree with the author. Art was, is and will be. Moreover, the flowering of art systems is still ahead. Concepts for the development of art exist and are already being tested systems include railguns and multi-charge systems and global fire control systems. I don’t know if Roman has read at least one of the concepts outlined. There is also development in the field of using ammunition, both in accuracy and in filling capacity. It’s too early to write off artillery and air defense is far from indicator of future development.
  36. 0
    21 December 2023 07: 27
    Quote: Uncle_Misha
    I wrote that regimental artillery is subordinate and not under the direct command of the regimental commander. According to whose orders and for what purposes the artillery operates is determined in advance. This could be any of the commanders you listed. Targets for regimental artillery are usually in the line of sight.


    We are talking about targets not in direct line of sight. Judging by what is shown, fire is usually conducted from closed positions, even tanks have begun to act this way.
    1. +1
      23 December 2023 15: 53
      But don’t judge by what is shown to the mass public. Look deeper.
  37. 0
    21 December 2023 07: 29
    Quote: ZloyKot
    "modern MLRS such as Smerch or Hymers have a longer firing range and better accuracy"
    range, maybe, but not accuracy. RSZO is initially shooting in areas. and the gun, when used skillfully, can be as accurate as a sniper rifle, even from closed positions


    Read the characteristics of Hymers or Smerchs. There are guided missiles, these are not Katyushas or Grads.
    1. 0
      21 December 2023 16: 34
      In terms of the accuracy of CURRENT guidance, both Smerch and TOS can be compared to a shot from an SVD-
      it all depends on TARGETING, ADJUSTMENT and, of course, the LITERACY OF THE GUNNERS....
    2. +1
      23 December 2023 15: 57
      Let's read. And we even tried it ourselves. There are even MLRS guided missiles, of which there are 1 in 1000 ordinary ones, no more accurate than the most ordinary direct-fire artillery shells, as Comrade correctly pointed out to you. ZloyCat wink
  38. +2
    21 December 2023 07: 51
    I wonder who fired 300000 shells and which are missing if the artillery runs away after the first salvo?
    This means counter-battery warfare is not that effective.
    1. +1
      23 December 2023 16: 00
      Nobody runs away, that's a myth. If shelling of the firing position begins, the crews wait in shelters. So it is according to the regulations, and according to reason, and according to instinct.
  39. 0
    21 December 2023 13: 31
    Some kind of maximalism. But does religion prohibit defending your artillery using electronic warfare and air defense systems? Shooting down UAVs and OTRK missiles. Then again it will be artillery against artillery (mutual artillery counter-battery combat). And here everyone will have equal chances. The article describes the matter in such a way that for some reason the enemy’s artillery has an advantage - it will probably cover the position with the first salvo. More precisely, those who have a larger number of guns will have an advantage, all other things being equal. Those. again everything will come to the conclusion that “God is on the side of the large battalions.”
  40. +2
    21 December 2023 13: 46
    Artillery is still the god of war, there’s nothing to even talk about here.
  41. +2
    21 December 2023 16: 05
    Well, let's go point by point......
    As for the “skilled” British warriors, this is something with reverence, considering that....planning operations for the Armed Forces of Ukraine is carried out by the BRITISH.....
    Somehow we don’t see REAL LARGE-scale successes for the Armed Forces of Ukraine like a couple of months ago, and even more so now.....
    Now about artillery......
    The term “offensive (large-scale) WITHOUT artillery preparation” has not yet been invented.... There are no such terms in military textbooks, so the role of artillery (large-scale strikes) is somehow too early to write off....
    Now-Bakhmut......
    An absolutely FAIR and VERIFIED decision - LEAVE IT TO THE GROUND......
    Administratively, Bakhmut is a regional town that has no significance, but...
    Spending manpower to capture it is generally a wrong decision, both from a military and political point of view....
    Further.....
    The author somehow modestly went over self-propelled guns (which are SUPERIOR to other types of artillery in power and mobility
    (I’ll modestly say nothing about the power of an artillery shell versus the warhead power of most Drones)....
    So he ranted about the artillery becoming a thing of the past - at least - illiterately...
    1. +1
      23 December 2023 16: 03
      Add - not yet invented defense, without setting good barrage fire. Several times a day. With every enemy attack. So untargeted in terms of area. More precisely, along the border. Based on previously prepared shooting data. Which instantly cooled down the enemy to attack. And then the ignorant will be surprised at the “lunar landscape”. God bless them, I'm tired of explaining! wink
  42. +2
    21 December 2023 17: 38
    NATO members, as usual, say quite obvious things and promise that their high technologies will defeat any enemy. If not right now, then in the near future, just give me money. In fact, they are not particularly ready either.
    What our people think is unknown, but there is an unshakable confidence that there are fools sitting there, not planning anything, and we definitely need to tell them not to “clean guns with bricks” (c).
    1. 0
      21 December 2023 19: 50
      Quote: Naked Man
      and you definitely need to tell them that “guns should not be cleaned with bricks” (c).

      The author cited a number of photographs where self-propelled guns and MLRS stand in ranks as if at a parade, naturally the average person has questions, but have you tried to disperse the equipment? Or is the enemy’s counter-battery fighting just words, and if the fighting has a pronounced positional nature, then maybe the guns should be installed in Pillboxes, or at least somehow under awnings. so that you can’t see from above what is underneath them, and it’s a good idea to cover the trenches, even with branches
  43. 0
    23 December 2023 01: 26
    The drone, His Highness the drone, is today a more lethal weapon than a howitzer. Yes, it doesn't fly that far. But it carries almost the same amount of explosives, and we’re not even talking about accuracy. The accuracy of a kamikaze drone in the front-line area surpasses even guided missiles. Well, the UAV costs much less than the Excalibur or Krasnopol.
    You are on a slippery slope with words like these. Although now it’s not as tough as before, they will still tear you to pieces.
    You can’t ride a UAV in a parade; the operator of this crap, instead of turning massive steel and cast iron knobs, sits with a game joystick. This damn thing itself does not rumble and does not shine for several kilometers. Does not engage in landscape design. Nonsense!
    Here, a few months ago, one of the commentators argued in a serious manner that drill training best contributes to uniting fighters and developing a sense of the shoulder of a comrade.
    We condemn our generals in every way for their lack of preparedness for the current realities of the war. Although the mass of citizens still live in the reality of WWII and are not going to recognize progress. I am sure that in the comments to the article someone will definitely give a heroic example or comparison of those times.
  44. 0
    24 December 2023 18: 41
    Barrel artillery will remain an effective means of counter-battery warfare, provided that long-range mobile artillery systems of the Coalition type are used, equipped with modern means of communication and integration into network-centric control and target designation systems and, importantly, reducing the links in the chain Detected - fired.
  45. 0
    29 December 2023 16: 26
    Blocher! An eccentric for the 13th letter of the alphabet! Can you count? Looks like NO!
    “Stalin only repeated an expression that a French general had uttered two centuries before him.”
    Why quote something that is obviously false in historical time!??
  46. 0
    21 May 2024 16: 52
    The future belongs to drone bombers.