How to hit and run correctly

114
How to hit and run correctly


Ordering M777 howitzers


Yes, information has arrived that the US Army is ordering M777 howitzers.



There are several reasons for this: the service life of the barrels is not very high, which if you shoot from them (and what else should howitzers do during war), then this resource ends, the barrel wears out, and its further use is more dangerous for the one who shoots than for the the one being shot at.

Plus the second reason is the counter-battery radar, missiles, shells and especially - drones "Lancet" type.

Of course, the howitzer itself is a very durable thing and designed to withstand overloads, but its aiming mechanisms have quite thin parts that can be disabled by a “cracker” of 2-3 kg of TNT.

And they take it out, yes.


Therefore, the American command decided to spend certain amounts of money on resuming production of the M777 towed howitzer, which has proven itself well in the Middle East and Ukraine.

But here the question immediately arises: to what extent is the towed M777 the best artillery for modern warfare?


We have already raised this topic more than once. And over time, our calculations only confirm the initial beliefs that towed artillery is a thing of the past. Well, or a good remedy against various terrorists who imagine themselves.

But recent Ukrainian experience shows that artillery mounted on self-propelled chassis, whether wheeled or tracked, is much better suited against high-end opponents armed with artillery detection radars.

Just numbers, and American ones at that.

Let’s take the same M777 and M109 “Palladin”, the same 155 mm, but on caterpillar tracks. Even the base is almost the same, the M776 155 mm gun with a barrel length of 39 calibers, which is the main element of the M777, is essentially an ejectorless version of the M284 barrel used in the M109A6 Paladin self-propelled guns.

So, M777 and M109 in numbers.

Crew/crew, people: 8/4 (for M109A7).
Rate of fire norm/max, rds/min: 2/5 and 1/4.
Travel speed over rough terrain, km/h: 24/56.
Deployment speed, min: less than 3/less than 1.
Folding speed, min: less than 2/less than 1.


Here we can say that the rate of fire of the guns is approximately the same, because these figures are all with reservations. Both guns can fire one or two shots per minute indefinitely, but a rate of fire of 4 times per minute is no more than 8-10 shots. Next stop, you need to cool the barrel.

But let's remember: howitzers can approach the firing line, position themselves, fire 8 shots, pack up and go back to their starting points. And this will take the M109 4–5 minutes, and the M777 7–8. And these are more important indicators, because a self-propelled howitzer has a huge advantage in firing time.

A modern army (any army) is equipped with counter-battery radar systems that can track artillery and target it with their destruction systems in the shortest possible time. The conflict in Ukraine showed this very clearly.

Towed guns are more vulnerable here, since not only do they require more time to deploy, but also in the event of a successful enemy artillery attack, the losses of completely unprotected soldiers are many times greater than those of self-propelled gunners, protected at least from shrapnel and bullets.

Here the message is clear: a towed battery will suffer much greater personnel losses than a similar self-propelled gun structure.


Contract


And now the US Army is beginning the process of resuming production of the M777 howitzers. A contract with the famous company British Aerospace for the production of titanium parts for new howitzers has been concluded. That is, there will be new howitzers, the only question is which ones.

Here you need to look at the structure of the artillery of the US Army. There's only three type of artillery systems: self-propelled 155 mm M109 in several modifications, towed British 155 mm M777 and 105 mm M119. This is somewhat different from the Russian Army, which has 8 types of self-propelled artillery and the same number of towed artillery. Unification, put at the forefront by example.

And in the artillery unit of the US Army, two types of howitzers are used: towed and tracked.


The M109A7 Paladin Tracked Howitzer is a 155mm howitzer mounted on a heavy armored chassis. The M777 Towed Howitzer is a 155mm gun mounted on a light wheeled artillery mount that is towed from site to site by a truck (what the Army calls a "tractor"). Paladins are used by the US Army's heavy armored brigades, while the lighter M777s are used by light infantry, airborne, air assault, mountain and Stryker brigades.

That is, given approximately the same firing range and the same ammunition load, the main difference factor here is the weight, which determines the mobility of the artillery system.

The M777 weighs just eight tons, due in part to the use of lightweight titanium, and can be carried by aircraft such as the C-130J Super Hercules, V-22 Osprey and the CH-47 Chinook helicopter.




However, the truck-gun system is not protected from enemy fire and does not have a high speed of movement due to the towing device, which is the Achilles heel of any towed artillery system.

The M109 weighs almost 40 tons and can only be carried by S-17 and S-5M transport aircraft. But, thanks to its tracks, it has good maneuverability, and the crew and gun are protected from small arms fire weapons and artillery fragments.

In general, this clearly suggests the conclusion that the best solution may actually be a howitzer that is mounted directly on a truck, which makes shooting and moving around the battlefield easier and faster.


For hundreds of years, artillery crews fired at enemy infantry and fortifications, with the enemy artillery often too far away and too difficult to hit. This effectively ended in the 20th century with the development of increasingly effective counter-battery technologies.

Today, artillery units are typically equipped with systems such as the American AN/TPQ-36 Firefinder radar or the Russian Zoo-2, which allow them to detect enemy artillery shells in flight and, using ballistics, pinpoint their point of departure. Thanks to these technologies, artillery suddenly became much more dangerous to enemy artillery.

The concept of using artillery against other artillery was developed for warfare against advanced armies with modern weapons systems. A good artillery counter-battery team, supported by reconnaissance units with UAVs, can detect incoming enemy artillery, calculate its firing positions, target and open fire on the enemy battery position before the initial salvo of enemy artillery is fired.

In other words, a modern artillery unit can expect return fire within seconds. However, the war in Ukraine, with its large number of artillery barrels on both sides, resulted in both Ukraine and Russia successfully using counter-battery radars to destroy enemy artillery.


Unlike the M109A7 Paladin, which can immediately hit the road after being fired, the M777 gun crew must first prepare the weapon for transport, then the truck must drive up to the gun position, then the weapon will be hitched to the truck, and they will both drive off. The Army says this so-called "move time" is less than three minutes.


The war in Ukraine also made clear that towed artillery is particularly vulnerable to counter-battery fire. A 2023 report from the Royal United Nations Institute for Defense Studies found that Russian artillery operating in Ukraine could complete a counter-battery mission in just three minutes. While the M777 takes two and a half times longer to complete a combat mission. Yes, the M777 can move from a firing position in less than three minutes, but for this to happen, the movement process must go without a hitch. All this leaves no room for error.

Option: make the artillery and the truck one.


French howitzer CAESAR

Between the M109A7 Paladin self-propelled howitzer and the M777 towed howitzer, there is a middle ground: a truck-mounted howitzer. There are several examples of truck-mounted howitzers, including the French CAESAR, the Swedish Archer, and the Israeli ATMOS 2000.

A howitzer mounted on a truck does not require time to deploy and fires directly from the spot. As a result, travel time is reduced from minutes to seconds. British defense contractor BAE Systems says the Archer can fire within 30 seconds of rolling into position. More importantly, he can leave within 30 seconds of the ceasefire.

The Nexter company, which produces the CAESAR howitzer, claims that the self-propelled gun can reach the line, fire six shots and return to its original position in less than two minutes. Both guns have a higher rate of fire, with the Archer achieving a fire rate of 9 rounds per minute.


ARCHER artillery system

Transport moment


Howitzers mounted on trucks easily exceed the weight limit of 30 tons or more, which makes them unsuitable for transportation by helicopter. As a result, they may not be well suited to light infantry and air assault units, which often travel long distances by helicopter.

But US Army units armed with the Stryker infantry fighting vehicle are in any case limited in their movement by transport aircraft. A truck-mounted howitzer could be just the thing to not only keep U.S. Army gunners alive, but also keep up with fast-moving Stryker vehicles.

Hack and predictor Aviator


The US Army, one might say, is not fighting in Ukraine, but the American military is drawing conclusions from the lessons of the Northern Military District. And chief among them is that artillery must be nimble to survive, and that seconds can mean the difference between artillery crews making a retreat and artillery crews being destroyed by the enemy. If the army wants to stay one step ahead of the enemy, it should seriously consider mounting the cannon directly on a truck, as many countries have already done.

The fact that this issue is already being widely discussed in the American specialized media suggests that experts have already made certain conclusions. The press in the United States is almost like the People's Republic of China, where you can't say everything and not always, but it's best when you need to. And since in the States they say that the American ground artillery needs a certain modernization, then you can be sure that this is not only agreed upon, but also, most likely, lobbied for in full, because the creation of a new artillery system is This is not a matter of a couple of months in time or a couple of hundred thousand in terms of budget.

So there is an opinion that it is a matter of time before the US Army gets a howitzer on a truck chassis. As for how to use this fast and mobile tool, manuals will be written quickly.

And it is worth noting that there is no such thing in the Russian Army, and is not even expected yet. All that is on the wheeled chassis is the Nona, a unique weapon, but completely incomparable with the 155 mm howitzer. Yes, we have “Acacias”, “Carnations”, “Msty”. On tracks. Heavier, more protected, slower. You can increase cross-country ability, which is better for tracked vehicles, but a howitzer on a cargo chassis does not necessarily have to climb into impassable quagmires. But with its speed data it will leave the area of ​​fire much more quickly than the same “Gvozdiki”, which crawl at a speed of 25–30 km/h and have little chance of a successful outcome if detected.

But this, I repeat, is much better than the crews of our D-30 and Msta-B scattered by explosions.

It would also be nice for our side to learn lessons from the SVO.
114 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +26
    20 January 2024 04: 14
    In fact, three axes are a low-resource howitzer. But regarding their analytics... It’s easier to hide in forest regiments and camouflage them from the counter-battery. I, too, after Chechnya (where I served in artillery reconnaissance) thought that self-propelled guns were more practical. But half a year spent in the Northern Military District made me think...
    1. -6
      20 January 2024 05: 06
      Dad, in there... everything was different... the Vovchiks had a louder beam, and there was nothing more than a pencil in the 2nd... And sometimes there were mines that flew onto your head. There was nothing special to oppose to both our Goddess and the Rooks, and the latter sometimes sat in a colander... but they lived. Now everything is different... and a year ago my mother told me not to spoil me...
      I’m on the other side.... for us to call you, if then..., and sometimes Rooks and sometimes almost point-blank at yourself. I’m not familiar with your specifics, but like when they threw cards around, and each for his own drinks So with the S-60, yes D-30 it seems (I’m not sure, I remember that it was separate)
      Quote: Bacha
      But half a year spent in the Northern Military District made me think...

      And here I don’t understand and the thought stops. Or rather, there is only 1 thought... DO NOT stop... otherwise it will fly... and then what... it doesn’t matter anymore... I swallowed a decent amount of fragments
      hi soldier
      1. +11
        20 January 2024 05: 21
        Enceladus, did you even understand what you wrote? wink
        1. -6
          20 January 2024 05: 24
          And what? If there is something incomprehensible and breaking gears, then I can explain it without any problems. A similar question to you... where is the specific question from at least one point? You can write your answer under any comment. If you don't understand, ask. hi
          1. +3
            20 January 2024 05: 26
            Quote from Enceladus
            If you don't understand, ask

            I'm afraid that the answer will be as "detailed" as your comment wink
            1. -7
              20 January 2024 05: 44
              Maybe I should write to the moderators where the +sys immediately come from under your comments? They swim crawl and breaststroke... tomorrow they said they will go to the sea. Do you think I'm not aware of this ecosystem on TW?
              Quote: Dutchman Michel
              I'm afraid that the answer will be as "expanded" as your comment

              Well, expand it, or are you afraid to get an answer?
              1. +4
                20 January 2024 05: 46
                Quote from Enceladus
                Maybe I should write to the moderators where the +sys immediately come from under your comments?

                Write, write, be sure to write, you are our writer! wink
                1. -2
                  20 January 2024 05: 50
                  Well, judging by the response, strikes have already been awarded to individual copies.
                  Quote: Dutchman Michel
                  you are our writer!

                  Are you already interested in my literature? Well then, read what I wrote, for example, six months ago about the case - the same thing.
                  You don't sound specific... Either ask a specific question or don't read my poetry - I didn't force you.
                  1. -1
                    20 January 2024 05: 52
                    Quote from Enceladus
                    Are you already interested in my literature?

                    You are a writer, like a sledgehammer from a bottle! I forgot to put quotation marks
                    1. -3
                      20 January 2024 05: 56
                      Don't be jealous... I have more than enough for "you".
                      1. I didn’t hear any specific questions
                      2. Where I was and served - you can read from May last year.
                      3. If p1. and 2 are unclear - ask questions and scratch your tongue elsewhere. I know a lot of “snipers” who shot with a slingshot at most hi
                      1. AAK
                        +1
                        20 January 2024 22: 16
                        Well, who proved what to whom with this shit, colleagues? The value of an article is the opportunity to extract useful information from it or think about a certain problem. You have a two-page habal and nothing in the bottom line, but a colleague immediately below us asks a very practical question - whose titanium? Or maybe ours, or maybe Ukrainian, or Canadian and Australian... The correct question is different - the Martras, in a practical sense, thought about creating their own "Caesar/Archer", the Geyropians already have such self-propelled guns in 10 countries, but here's what we have? And in our apartment there is gas, i.e. a wunderwaffle with a gun part from the timeless Msta and a chassis from a missile tractor - i.e. instead of 18-22 tons of enemy force, we received (or rather, we will only get in a slightly foreseeable future) a mastodon weighing the T-62 and with a range of 15-20 kilometers less, and also without new counter-battery radars as part of artillery divisions, well, everything is as usual with defective managers
                      2. 0
                        20 January 2024 22: 30
                        Quote: AAK
                        Well, who proved what to whom with this shit, colleagues?

                        Well, the moderator wrote to me that they gave strikes to someone for violating the rules am
                        I didn’t ask again in what topic.
                        Quote: AAK
                        whose titanium?

                        I also answered this question, on the same pre-war bottles there were 18 AIF or whatever they were called... there was also a lot of alimini and other things. During wartime, during production, everything was changed to steel. This is a characteristic of peacetime, when convenience overcomes practicality and production.
                        Quote: AAK
                        And we have gas in our apartment,

                        It's better than nothing. hi
                      3. +3
                        21 January 2024 02: 08
                        Quote: AAK
                        And in our apartment there is gas, i.e. a wunderwaffle with a gun part from the age-old Msta and a chassis from a missile tractor - i.e. instead of 18-22 tons of enemy force, we received (or rather, we will only get in a slightly foreseeable future) a mastodon weighing the T-62 and with a range of 15-20 kilometers less,

                        Well, firstly, this self-propelled gun was sculpted even before the SVO, and was offered for export, so they just quickly finished it off and offered it as a quick ready-made solution. At the same time, nothing prevents us from installing a gun from the “Coalition” on them a little later with a slight modification of the chassis for a gun with greater recoil. The main thing is that the chassis (base) is already ready. In addition, right now, to ensure mass production, you can use Msta-B guns for them from storage, which will reduce the cost and speed up the process. In any case, we will get self-propelled guns on wheels instead of towed guns, which will in any case increase survivability and simplify their transfer. In addition, today I am not sure that the production of barrels for the Coalition-SV today is at such a level that it will cover the production of the tracked Coalition-SV and their simplified wheeled self-propelled guns with the same gun. But in the near future I am sure that he will be able to. Moreover, a ready-made project for such an SPG with a Coalition gun may not yet be in finished form.
                        ... And perhaps there is and we will hear about it soon.
                        Quote: AAK
                        and also without new counter-battery radars as part of artillery divisions,

                        And you take a closer look at the two radar-phase array panels on the Coalition-SV. It is quite possible that an autonomous version of it will soon appear in the army on some convenient chassis such as an armored car or armored personnel carrier.

                        As for “Malva,” I wouldn’t throw poop; it’s much better than just “Msta-B.” And the old D-20 is much more long-range. Quite a quick solution to the issue.
                      4. +1
                        21 January 2024 14: 47
                        .And you take a closer look at the two radar-phase-array panels on the "Coalition-SV"

                        Of course we are looking closely. But it seems that this is a ballistic radar, not for reconnaissance. In a word, he looks after his own projectile, not others.
                      5. +3
                        21 January 2024 17: 50
                        Quote: stankow
                        Of course we are looking closely. But it seems that this is a ballistic radar, not for reconnaissance. In a word, he looks after his own projectile, not others.

                        This is a radar, and what it monitors depends on the software. Its shells fly up to 70 km. , therefore, she sees shells at approximately the same distance. Install such a radar on an armored personnel carrier and use the ballistics of enemy shells to calculate the location of their gun or MLRS launcher. This radar is much more compact than Zoo-2, and it seems to see farther away.
                      6. 0
                        22 January 2024 00: 23
                        Not only from software. And from the operator, and from the antenna, and communication with the control panel. Where does the radar operator in the tank come from?
                      7. 0
                        29 February 2024 18: 47
                        Quote: bayard
                        Install such a radar on an armored personnel carrier and use the ballistics of enemy shells to calculate the location of their gun or MLRS launcher. This radar is much more compact than Zoo-2, and it seems to see farther away.

                        In the USSR there was an artillery radar reconnaissance station based on the MtLB SNARR. I don’t know the details; I was a sound meter at the AZK-5 complex
    2. +2
      21 January 2024 14: 41
      Another 777 is inactive. Look how funny her wheels are. Weighing 4 tons!? They are designed only for airport concrete. From the transporter to the suspended helicopter waiting for her. And to the base. What kind of towing are we talking about? On black soil? In the Arctic? Where was it not on the Russian theater of operations?
    3. 0
      25 January 2024 22: 13
      What is your opinion about the concept of a self-propelled howitzer like the “Denel”, which has 4 wheels, with a motor for self-propulsion from the caponier to the truck, a 45-caliber barrel and a range of 40 km?
  2. +9
    20 January 2024 04: 25
    Whose titanium is in three sevens?
    1. -5
      20 January 2024 05: 12
      In aif aif 8.8 it is the same flak 18... there was also a lot of things at the beginning... and towards the end when 37 and emnip 41, everything was already steel. So titanium, that’s it - peacetime excess/fat request
    2. +13
      20 January 2024 05: 39
      You will also ask from whose gas explosives are made in Europe and from whose oil diesel fuel is made for Ukrainian tanks
      1. +5
        20 January 2024 08: 31
        Why not ask? But they are unlikely to answer.
    3. +3
      20 January 2024 20: 16
      Quote: Andrey Moskvin
      Whose titanium is in three sevens?

      But in general, the main source of titanium supplies in the world is China, but it may well be ours, as well as the Ukrainian one. Ukraine is also among the leaders in its production and processing
  3. +8
    20 January 2024 04: 41
    It’s strange, why nothing is said about our development of a howitzer on a wheeled chassis 8x8 BAZ 6610-027 “Voshchina”, 152 mm. with a barrel length of 47 calibers 2A64, “Malva”. Firing range - 24,5 km, rate of fire - up to 7 rounds/min, crew - 5 people, amount of transportable ammunition - 30 rounds, dimensions length/width/height - 13 / 2,75 / 3,1 meters, total weight - 32 tons. In October 2023 The first samples entered service with the Russian Army.
    1. +2
      20 January 2024 05: 25
      Quote: Sergey39
      "Mallow". Firing range - 24,5 km

      Firing range is too small
      1. 0
        20 January 2024 09: 01
        The barrel length is 47 calibers, and for range they created the Coalition SV self-propelled gun with a barrel length of 52 calibers, a firing range of up to 70 km.
    2. The comment was deleted.
    3. 0
      21 January 2024 01: 44
      It’s strange, why nothing is said about our development?

      It’s probably a shame, that’s what I can’t say
    4. 0
      21 January 2024 14: 55
      You don’t understand that this is different. Russian doesn't count. What to discuss, since it’s not Western!? wink
  4. The comment was deleted.
  5. +4
    20 January 2024 05: 19
    It would also be nice for our side to learn lessons from the SVO.

    What is there to study there? Shit, saying something about this has become fraught...
    Quote: Andrey Moskvin
    Whose titanium is in three sevens?

    Whose titanium in Russia would you like to inquire about?
    https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/ВСМПО-Ависма
    So they just took it and rewrote everything on themselves... And titanium flows into enemy countries to enemy servants...
    What kind of hypocrisy is this?
  6. +3
    20 January 2024 05: 25
    Here's how you look at it. For the European theater of operations with their developed road infrastructure, wheeled vehicles are just right. For the realities of Russian roads, a howitzer on a tank chassis is preferable. YouTube is full of videos about swimming in armored vehicles. And Western models are sad
    1. +1
      20 January 2024 05: 48
      Quote: shinobi
      For the realities of Russian roads, a howitzer on a tank chassis is preferable

      You took it right off my tongue wink
    2. +5
      20 January 2024 06: 05
      Quote: shinobi
      Here's how you look at it. For the European theater of operations with their developed road infrastructure, wheeled vehicles are just right. For the realities of Russian roads, a howitzer on a tank chassis is preferable. YouTube is full of videos about swimming in armored vehicles. And Western models are sad

      It must be both.
      The concept of a theater of operations, even in this case, is secondary. The main thing is to find compromises, not only by combining the unification of the element base of self-propelled guns (artillery unit, control system, etc.) with a wheel and a gusli, but to guess in the development of the “god of war as a whole”!
    3. 0
      20 January 2024 08: 35
      Quote: shinobi
      For the realities of Russian roads, a howitzer on a tank chassis is preferable.

      You can install it, like all kinds of mortars, in a truck trailer. On the one hand, separate complex special chassis are not needed, on the other hand, the trailer will protect the crew. When this happened, out of necessity, I had to come up with MPAPs made from components of ordinary cars, but it’s not difficult to make a technically simple trailer that protects the crew.
      Another option is pre-installed, transportable and towed anti-fragmentation shelters and containers. In this case, the payment is also protected.
      1. -1
        29 February 2024 18: 50
        Quote: ycuce234-san
        You can install it like all sorts of mortars, in a truck trailer. On the one hand, separate complex special chassis are not needed, on the other hand, the trailer will protect the crew.

        Funny....until the 1st shot...
        Our 2S3 moved half a meter with each shot...
        I won’t even guess where the wheels will fly off the trailer.
        1. 0
          29 February 2024 19: 08
          Quote: your1970
          .until the 1st shot...

          In any case, it is better to have something than to do nothing. The same highly mobile protective container-trailer that can protect against shrapnel and shock waves. You can deploy the gun on the ground, but inside such a structure and not in a completely open area. Another option is protection only from the sides and not from the top - you can make a frame structure of the trailer on which to place a lightweight reinforced concrete slab (or a wall made of logs) vertically, as is done on slab trailers, and place such movable protective devices on three sides. This will be enough in many cases to protect against shrapnel and this is not a high-tech prodigy, but a simple and feasible design.
          The tires are pneumatic, although it is better to immediately notice steel rims or caterpillar tracks, as on heavy agricultural trailers or road equipment, since they will not last long there.
    4. +2
      20 January 2024 09: 07
      Quote: shinobi
      For the European theater of operations with their developed road infrastructure, wheeled vehicles are just the thing.
      Thus, towed howitzers are usually delivered on wheeled vehicles
    5. +3
      20 January 2024 20: 20
      Quote: shinobi
      .For the realities of Russian roads, a howitzer on a tank chassis is preferable

      Don't live in the past. The European part of Russia has a well-developed road network
      Quote: shinobi
      YouTube is full of videos about swimming in armored vehicles.

      Such “swims” are possible in any, even the most developed country, this is not an indicator. The indicator is the degree of development of the road network in a particular region
  7. 0
    20 January 2024 05: 34
    It would also be nice for our side to learn lessons from the SVO.

    Roman hits on a sore spot.
  8. +14
    20 January 2024 05: 38
    The question is price and methods of application. The self-propelled gun is large, it is difficult to hide it in case of rapid migration back and forth. The shells in it are stored in ammunition at a height of more than a meter from the ground. That is, it will burn all together from a couple of fragments of a shell that fell nearby. The crew is sitting near this ammunition rack. We have seen M109 and other crabs exploding together with the crew more than once.
    An ordinary howitzer is squat, it is hidden in the landing - it can only be noticed with X-rays, probably at the moment of firing. The shells are scattered on the ground and will only light up if they fall very close. If trenches are dug near the howitzer, then the soldiers will jump there at the first whistle of a shell or lancet. Looking at the video, I don’t immediately remember any cases where it flew straight into the crowd of loaders.
    Tactics with towed howitzers look like this: someone has gotten used to landing them well in advance, and the crew moves from one to another, shoots, jumps into an armored car and to another howitzer. I remember the news was that Burevestnik offered automation equipment for all sorts of D-20s, where the crew would only have to deliver the shells, and it would aim itself. Such a thing! If it turns out that something has already landed on a howitzer in the bushes - well, what can you do, the guys at the factory will make new ones.
    The question is of course the price. If you have the means to rivet howitzers so that you can stick them under each bush and run between them, then why not? And if three such howitzers cost as much as a whole self-propelled gun, then a self-propelled gun is probably better.
    1. +2
      20 January 2024 09: 09
      Quote from alexoff
      An ordinary howitzer is squat, it is hidden in the landing - it can only be noticed with X-rays, probably at the moment of firing.
      Previously, yes, now, with the development of UAVs, it’s already more difficult
      1. +2
        20 January 2024 15: 39
        It’s more difficult, of course, to accurately hit targets using radar data alone. And no neural network will find howitzers in landings on a considerable number of videos, so many different things have been thrown at it.
    2. -5
      20 January 2024 10: 00
      I was told that you can’t fire more than 3 shots, after the third arte you need to quit!!! Because when you make the second shot, a sighting shell falls already 300 meters away!!! With the first shot, no one hits anywhere, but with the second they can already cover, and with the third they will definitely hit!!!

      And in Russia, the Malva wheeled self-propelled gun seems to have been adopted; it’s really not that long-range, but it’s probably fast enough to avoid a response!
      1. +1
        20 January 2024 18: 02
        It quickly flies over artillery located close to the front edge. Otherwise, videos of shooting from camouflaged positions from Msta-B and Giatsint would not have come across. Most likely it will go to the mortar men and crews of the D-20 and D-30 howitzers.
  9. +2
    20 January 2024 05: 41
    I'm not good at artillery, but what is that thing laid out around the gun? Are there some empty bags lying around, and next to them are bags full of something? Third photo from top. Thank you...
    https://topwar.ru/uploads/posts/2024-01/45.webp
    1. +1
      20 January 2024 14: 00
      I believe these are sandbags for better stabilization and vibration damping.
      1. +2
        20 January 2024 16: 03
        Quote: Knell Wardenheart
        I believe these are sandbags for better stabilization and vibration damping

        There are a lot of empty bags lying there, and they are lying in a circle...
        1. +1
          21 January 2024 01: 13
          This is just for beauty and show off. Well, maybe American safety requirements - the circle indicates the area near the howitzer, where at the moment of the shot there should be a minimum of l/s.
    2. +1
      21 January 2024 15: 13
      Showing off. According to the regulations, there should be an anti-fragmentation barrier half a meter high. But since they are at the base, there is a three-meter fence made of gabions around them, I was too lazy to build it. They just marked it, which makes the inspectors happy. They will definitely put it in the field, the question of survival.
  10. +2
    20 January 2024 05: 48
    There is information everywhere - we have so many tanks at our storage bases. How many artillery systems do we have in storage?
    1. +1
      22 January 2024 00: 25
      At the beginning of the Northern War, Russia had 16600 tanks. Everything, from new to the last one awaiting major repairs at the bases. I don’t remember the artillery systems, but many times more. According to Jane's Defense Review.
  11. +3
    20 January 2024 05: 49
    I do not understand. It seems that quite recently Roman wrote an article that artillery is everything, i.e. is already dying. Including self-propelled guns?
  12. +2
    20 January 2024 05: 56
    And it is worth noting that there is no such thing in the Russian Army, and is not even expected yet. All that is on the wheeled chassis is the Nona, a unique weapon, but completely incomparable with the 155 mm howitzer. Yes, we have “Acacias”, “Carnations”, “Msty”. On tracks. Heavier, more protected, slower. You can increase cross-country ability, which is better for tracked vehicles, but a howitzer on a cargo chassis does not necessarily have to climb into impassable quagmires. But with its speed data it will leave the area of ​​fire much more quickly than the same “Gvozdiki”, which crawl at a speed of 25–30 km/h and have little chance of a successful outcome if detected.

    I agree that there is no serial production of 152mm wheeled self-propelled guns yet, but a series of tests of a series of wheeled self-propelled guns and mortars will be completed.
    For example, Malka, and the SVK Coalition is just around the corner. In addition to them, the 130mm Bereg has been in service with the Soviet/Russian army for almost four decades.
  13. -1
    20 January 2024 06: 36
    When choosing between a self-propelled howitzer and a trailed one, you should choose an unmanned light one. Artillery (firing from closed positions) is the very first and simplest candidate for automation. It’s all so simple: I’m surprised why it hasn’t been done yet.
    And if there are no people, then armor is not needed. And super speed when changing positions...
  14. +10
    20 January 2024 06: 41
    Even from the front they write that everything is exactly the opposite and the combat stability of towed artillery is higher than that of self-propelled guns because one hit on a self-propelled gun and it’s gone, but after a shelling the towed one is patched up and shoot on, well, they wrote above that self-propelled guns are big fools, you'll hide it.
    1. +1
      20 January 2024 07: 38
      Quote: Cartalon
      and towed after shelling, patch it up and continue shooting

      The artillery crew, unfortunately, cannot be patched up
      1. +4
        20 January 2024 08: 28
        If the self-propelled gun's ammunition took off, then of course
      2. +1
        21 January 2024 15: 24
        During the shelling, the crews and self-propelled guns and towed ones are in shelters. And the probability of survival is the same. In terms of material, of course, the towed ones have the advantage. There, fragments can only damage the anti-recoil devices. The gunner takes a panorama before he dives into the gap in a matter of seconds.
    2. +1
      21 January 2024 15: 19
      The stability of a towed one is much higher, since it is much easier to camouflage and dig in.
  15. +2
    20 January 2024 07: 25
    The question is, do we now have Grabins and Petrovs to design and make the necessary and modern artillery? Design bureaus, research institutes? Just repeat Caesar, Archer? Or a small tractor to rearrange and pull the MSTA-B 500 meters away from the retaliatory strike.
    1. +1
      20 January 2024 09: 11
      Quote: V.
      Just repeat Caesar, Archer?
      repeated "Malva", only its range is half as long, and this is already fundamental hi
    2. +2
      20 January 2024 15: 49
      There are always hornbeams. There are not always people's commissars who will say - we need guns, many guns for a future war, accurate and long-range. And when ministers are preparing not for a future war, not for a past war, but for parades, it turns out that this is what the USSR developed - that’s how you fight
    3. 0
      21 January 2024 01: 20
      You can ask the Chinese for help.

      They have this: 155mm PCL-181
      https://topwar.ru/uploads/posts/2024-01/514414_5_.webp

      https://xn--h1ajim.xn--p1ai/PCL-181_(%D0%A1%D0%90%D0%A3)
      https://tiberius66.livejournal.com/1959214.html

      Pakistan has already purchased a trial batch.

      And with a smaller caliber of 122 mm, China has such a miracle Yudo PLC-171:
      https://rg.ru/2020/12/10/novaia-122-mm-mobilnaia-samohodka-na-shassi-bronevika-predstavlena-v-knr.html
    4. 0
      21 January 2024 15: 33
      There are guns with a built-in engine. But they didn’t justify themselves. Once the shelling began, both according to the regulations and according to reason, the reaction of the CO was one - “Calculation - in ukritia.” There is no talk of any tractors or movements or removal from positions when shells in position explode. The enemy will shoot and calm down, the battery is not an easy target. To defeat you need hundreds of shells and a good half hour of shooting. In the meantime, other batteries, including mortars, will come to the rescue.
  16. -6
    20 January 2024 09: 13
    The guns must either be placed on the vehicle or on the tracks and simply stop releasing guns, this is killing our soldiers
    Such vehicles and aircraft must be equipped so that they are not hit by drones
    1. +1
      20 January 2024 09: 24
      But you can’t just stupidly build protected positions for guns at a distance of 10 km from the front line
    2. +1
      21 January 2024 15: 34
      АkexWar You ask the artillerymen what they need!
  17. -3
    20 January 2024 10: 51
    Another iron fact that Skomorokhov forgot about: automatic reloading of the gun! Only Archer and Cesar have it! Therefore, these howitzers can fire 7-8 rounds per minute and evade a retaliatory strike with lightning speed! On Palladin and M777 everything is done by hand, this is already the last century! Then what is the point of resuming production of the M777? Speed ​​in the Ukrainian theater of operations often directly affects the survivability of a particular artillery system!
    1. 0
      20 January 2024 17: 40
      The M777 is lightweight and transportable, and can be transported by helicopter on a sling.
      1. +1
        21 January 2024 15: 37
        Are there many helicopters in Ukraine for transporting 777s? And how often is such a maneuver needed?
  18. -2
    20 January 2024 10: 59
    Towed artillery is extremely vulnerable to counter-battery fire. Not to mention the fact that a howitzer, half made of titanium, costs crazy money. You can wish mattress makers, creative Uzbeks.
  19. -5
    20 January 2024 11: 07
    What then is the point of resuming production of the M777? After the first shot, a lancet will fly in and reset it! Towed artillery is easy prey for drones!
  20. 0
    20 January 2024 11: 20
    Just now FPV drones have appeared and the lancet cannot be said that tracked howitzers are better. The future belongs to UAVs.
    1. +1
      20 January 2024 12: 07
      The UAVs are flying until they find a bolt with the right thread. In general, all the weapons are old.
  21. BAI
    -2
    20 January 2024 11: 21
    that towed artillery is a thing of the past

    Rave. This is one of the options for the future of artillery. Only artillery will be cheap, disposable. He fired and threw it away. And all lovers of counter-battery combat can enjoy shooting at garbage while getting hit by a retaliatory strike
    1. +1
      21 January 2024 15: 40
      There have been these for a long time, since the Second World War. PCs that launched straight out of the container. But they didn’t take root; there are big drawbacks.
  22. BAI
    0
    20 January 2024 11: 22
    that towed artillery is a thing of the past

    Rave. This is one of the options for the future of artillery. Only artillery will be cheap, disposable. He fired and threw it away. And all lovers of counter-battery combat can enjoy shooting at garbage while getting hit by a retaliatory strike
    1. +3
      20 January 2024 12: 13
      It's expensive. The costs of one-time (tank, plane, robot...) weapons are not justified.
  23. +3
    20 January 2024 12: 13
    From the combat sofa.
    The main problem for any army is that weapons designed for counterinsurgency in low-intensity conflicts are ill-suited for a major war.
    The main idea of ​​the M777 is a 155mm howitzer that can be carried by a main transport helicopter, hence the maximum lightweight design up to and including the titanium barrel. The helicopter will bring the M777 to a point from where it will control the area. That's all it was designed for, for "colonial wars", where it showed itself well. But here is an “adult” opponent, not inferior technically.
    Resumption of production - firstly, replenishment of reserves, and secondly, who are we fighting with?
    Let me remind you that, according to the United States, they are facing a conflict with China on the islands. Dragging a howitzer by helicopter to the island and terrorizing the surrounding area is the way to go.
    1. +2
      20 January 2024 13: 16
      I agree completely. And I’ll even throw in an idea for installing the M777 on a carriage similar to the D-30A. So the M777 with a 155 mm/39 caliber weighs 4,3 tons (our D-30A with a 122 mm/35 caliber weighs only 3,3 tons). And if the design of our carriage is implemented in titanium for “three axes”, then it will receive all-round fire (that very tasty thing for the defense of Pacific atolls and bulk islands), and the weight will not exceed the existing tonnage, and, most importantly, they will spend money like we did on " Coalition"! smile
      1. +1
        21 January 2024 15: 47
        Scharnhorst Look at the Russian Pat-B. The same 152 mm, the same weight, but everything is made of steel, without any titanium! And with normal wheels and full frames! And all-round shelling.
        1. +1
          21 January 2024 18: 13
          Another would argue, but I agree! Only the M777 shoots at 24000 - 40000 meters, and the PAT-B only at 15000 meters... The eternal Russian question: WHAT TO DO? in a broad sense
          1. +1
            22 January 2024 00: 33
            40 km is active-reactive. Which Pat-B can do too. And in general, 15,000 m is enough for the eyes. The regiment commander has no further tasks.
    2. 0
      20 January 2024 15: 54
      These howitzers are most likely intended for the rebels. And for a big war, apparently, less valuable peoples, trade sanctions and blockades, complemented by long-range missile strikes, will be used. Americans somehow don’t like to fight on fronts
    3. +1
      21 January 2024 15: 42
      Not a fighter Your comment is the most sensible, congratulations!
  24. +6
    20 January 2024 12: 17
    The article is so primitive and amateurish that it’s almost not worth commenting on. The author proves to himself the misconceptions that he himself invented. His statements have nothing in common with artillery. It’s unlikely that I’ve ever fired a shot in my life. But generalizes!?
  25. +1
    20 January 2024 13: 38
    Quote: V.
    Just repeat Caesar, Archer?

    To do this you need not only a gun, but also a truck. Judging by the fact that the Msta was attached to a small-scale, expensive and oversized BAZ, even the 4-axle KamAZ is either weak or unstable for 152 mm artillery. Perhaps Koala on KamAZ will refute these arguments. Or her absence will be confirmed.
  26. +1
    20 January 2024 14: 57
    Why doesn’t the author even read the news on the site? "Malva" has been accepted into service and is already being supplied. On a wheeled chassis.
    https://ria.ru/20231026/malva-1905290609.html
  27. +1
    20 January 2024 16: 45
    There is an error in the article. The weight of the M777 is not eight tons, but 4218 kg. Weight close to 8000 is most likely in feet, not kilograms. If it were so heavy there would be no point in it.
    The domestic long-range howitzers Msta-B and Giatsint have a weight close to 8 tons.
    In our country, the 122 mm D-30 and 152 mm D-1 of the 1943 model have a weight close to three or four tons. The range of which leaves much to be desired. During training exercises, paratroopers manage to carry the D-30 on a sling with a modern modification of the Mi-8 helicopter.
    1. +1
      21 January 2024 15: 50
      I agree, just please don’t assign Hyacinth to howitzers. More typical guns and you won't find it.
  28. +6
    20 January 2024 16: 48
    Between the M109A7 Paladin self-propelled howitzer and the M777 towed howitzer, there is a middle ground: a truck-mounted howitzer.
    This is not a golden mean, this is the bottom.
    1. A towed howitzer has the best chance of being where you need it when you need it. It is easiest to deliver to the point of use. A howitzer on an MTLB truck may no longer be able to be carried away, and strategic mobility will have problems quite comparable to the problems of transporting normal tracked self-propelled guns.
    2. A wheeled self-propelled gun will not be reserved: it is already heavy for its wheelbase.
    3. The difficulties of camouflaging wheeled and tracked self-propelled guns are quite comparable; a towed one is the easiest to hide. And if you have time to dig a gap or even a dugout for the crew, you can survive the artillery attack without losses.
    4. If the chassis of a wheeled or tracked self-propelled gun becomes damaged, it will become useless, and the towed one will simply be attached to another vehicle.
    Conclusion: it is necessary to modify the carriage so that it allows it to automatically roll up in a minimum amount of time, better so that it is possible to fire without disconnecting from the vehicle (yes, it’s unlikely, but what if they do it?). And if we manage to make an automatic loader, then it will be very good.
    1. +1
      20 January 2024 17: 47
      Abstract reasoning is beautiful, sometimes even convincing. But reality happens to be different. The production of the chassis for the "Acacia" was covered (or it was covered) with a copper basin. Tank factories and factories for the production of infantry fighting vehicles are loaded through the roof for sure.
      What should self-propelled artillery be mounted on?
    2. +1
      21 January 2024 15: 53
      bk0010 In your person, a healthy mind has finally arrived at the discussion. Unfortunately, she has already been bombarded with dozens of wild comments... laughing
  29. +3
    20 January 2024 19: 01
    Quote: Rand-76
    Then what is the point of resuming production of the M777?

    There are no others, but you have to shoot
  30. fiv
    +1
    20 January 2024 19: 37
    To summarize everything that has been written, the SVO needs a D-30 or M777, bolted into the back of a maximum 10-ton truck with outriggers, with slightly increased cross-country ability, with GLONASS, a weather station and a tablet.
    1. -1
      21 January 2024 15: 59
      A separate means of fire destruction of owls. You don’t need Glonass, a tablet, or, especially, a metro station. Such things are needed at the battery and division command posts and they have been there for a long, long time. Separate does the engine cylinder need a GPS navigator, radio and external temperature sensor?
      1. fiv
        +1
        21 January 2024 16: 49
        How to determine the coordinates of the firing position for the battery command post and carry out closed information exchange with it? How does the command post know the weather in the direction of fire? So a minimum set is needed.
        1. -1
          22 January 2024 00: 47
          Determine the responsibility of the senior officer of the battery to coordinate the OP. There are 101 ways and they teach it for 4 years. If he has a Glonass navigator, so much the better. But not every weapon! It is a little more difficult to set the main direction, but here optics or a surveyor with gyroscopes will help. If not, it doesn’t matter, there is a method, and more than one. A weather bulletin is broadcast every two hours by the division's weather station. For all artillery, mortar and rocket batteries. Communications are dealt with in communications. The senior officer has contact with the battery and division command posts. Walkie-talkies can be bigger, but he doesn’t run around with them. He has a signalman and a separate control machine...
          1. ada
            +2
            27 January 2024 04: 56
            Greetings!
            You're here, it looks like one of the artillerymen fellow
            fiv (Igor) most likely conveys a certain vision of an autonomous weapon - a tactical unit, where the CO is its own SOB, and the unit itself (crew, crew) operates in isolation from the regular unit (platoon, battery or division) of the HF artillery, but is included (highlighted) as part of the ROC (reconnaissance and fire complex) with other tactical units with reconnaissance and control equipment (UAV, artillery spotter with communications and surveillance or target designation/guidance equipment, and launchers (PPU) of the required level). And in the ROC it can be allocated on a permanent basis on call and as a standby facility or for a certain period of time for a specific task. In fact, in this case, the commander of the platoon (battery) which includes the gun will be occupied only with issues of ensuring and maintaining the readiness of such a tactical unit, and the SOB will also be engaged in additional training for the crew to replace himself with the OP as the commander of the gun.
            This stems from the need to use non-standard tactics in the current conditions of the Northern Military District, to search for possible options for using artillery in order to optimize the attraction of fire assets while minimizing expected losses and the sufficiency of fire from an individual gun/platoon. It is worth noting here the frequent fire maneuver with the change of deployed guns and luring the enemy artillery towards himself in order to determine its positions. Also, in the conditions of artillery operation, it is worth noting the virtual absence of canonical counter-battery warfare due to the predominant involvement of individual guns/platoons in fire work. That is, what is taken here as a “counter-battery” is not one due to the absence of firing batteries/divisions in the usual combat formations and with the corresponding costs of armored personnel and is carried out in relation to the rules of shooting at a separate target of appropriate importance, but with a clearly limited number of barrels and at minimal costs b/p.
            It is for such a tactical unit that the entire range of instrumentation is required for independent full preparation and maintenance of the control system and control of the technical condition of the weapon.
            1. +1
              3 February 2024 16: 30
              Yes, you described it exactly. Only you propose such tactics, but comrade fiv thinks that it is the main one and there are no others.
  31. -1
    20 January 2024 19: 56
    There is only one conclusion, the United States is going to continue the war in Ukraine, this requires cheap and simple weapons, which is essentially what the M777 is. At the same time, the life of mercenaries and the Armed Forces of Ukraine interests them on a residual basis
    1. +2
      21 January 2024 16: 03
      777 is not cheap and not simple. But the United States has no other. And the 777 itself was not developed by Amer’s British from BAE.
  32. +4
    20 January 2024 21: 02
    The M777 weighs just eight tons, due in part to the use of lightweight titanium

    Roman is wrong, the M777 howitzer weighs 4218 kg. Very light and openwork design with plenty of hydraulics. For comparison, our D-20 weighs 5650 kg. However, this openwork is what made the M777 a favorite UAV target, wherever the Lancet hits, it will certainly break through some kind of tube and set it on fire.
  33. +1
    20 January 2024 21: 53
    Damn you, apologists for artillery pieces and other military equipment on automobile chassis. I sincerely wish you to serve in them.
    1. 0
      22 January 2024 14: 28
      There are several reasons why the creation of self-propelled guns on wheeled chassis for the Airborne Forces began. This is a low price, and less weight and automation of guidance, as well as other less significant factors.
      In modern conditions, motorization, among other things, makes it possible to equip self-propelled guns with anti-drone capabilities, which towed artillery does not have.
      1. +2
        22 January 2024 19: 43
        There are several reasons why the creation of self-propelled guns on wheeled chassis for the Airborne Forces began. This is a low price, and less weight and automation of guidance, as well as other less significant factors

        ... without taking into account the noticeably higher dimensions of wheeled self-propelled guns, significant restrictions on cross-country ability even with a slight deterioration in weather conditions, restrictions on gun guidance, the absence, as it turned out, of advantages in reliability, additional requirements for transportation on trawls (and this is also unexpected turned out to be important), the almost complete impossibility of operating in off-road conditions, which means a strict connection to the road network, predictability of choice and the difficulty of camouflaging firing positions to the delight of enemy reconnaissance, and other less significant factors.
  34. 0
    21 January 2024 01: 37
    Russia is not such a rich country that it can produce a series of weapons in accordance with climatic and landscape conditions, in accordance with the conditions of current armed conflicts. Wheeled vehicles are of course easier to hide in areas with a developed road network.....even off roads. Wheel imprints on the soil are less noticeable than those caused by geese. but tracked vehicles are more versatile for all-season operation....if we are forced to fight year-round. Any self-propelled vehicle allows you to quickly leave a position over a short distance. and to clear the sky from search and kamikaze quadrics.....a requirement for military experts and scientists....all over the world. a stationary cannon in position is an anachronism....a stationary target for the enemy’s computer technology.
  35. +2
    22 January 2024 09: 03
    Now they pay for the number of characters?) butter, butter, it’s hard to even finish reading)

    Essentially:
    1. Self-propelled guns like Msta or Paladin are cool, but expensive. Even those mattresses can’t make all the artillery self-propelled.
    2. A gun towed by a truck over one mounted on a truck has a number of advantages: any truck can tow any gun, the same truck carries ammunition, failure of the truck means failure of the gun in the case of self-propelled guns.
    3. Something really needs to be decided about calibers. However, I suspect that we use 122 mm purely because they exist.
  36. +3
    22 January 2024 13: 56
    The article is taken from popular mechanics, but is not cited in the sources. We are getting worse and worse. request

    https://www.popularmechanics.com/military/weapons/a46318054/us-restarting-m777-howitzer-production/
  37. 0
    23 January 2024 01: 32
    Quote from Enceladus
    Now everything is different.


    Yes, a distant relative, was there during the second hour.
    Looking at how our people are fighting in the Northern Military District, he says: “I don’t understand at all how you can fight when the enemy almost always sees you in plain sight?”
  38. +2
    25 January 2024 16: 02
    You can increase cross-country ability, which is better for tracked vehicles, but a howitzer on a cargo chassis does not necessarily have to climb into impassable quagmires.

    And if the quagmire is everywhere, then what? Shall we not shoot?
  39. ada
    0
    27 January 2024 05: 06
    Quote: Bogalex
    ... I sincerely wish you to serve for them.

    Have pity on them, at least send them to BRAV winked
  40. +1
    29 February 2024 19: 33
    Dear forum users!
    Artillery is not a very simple weapon. Only very rich countries can afford to have a large number of self-propelled guns. They are expensive to create, maintain and use. In addition, preparing an ACS crew requires much more time and training (you need not only to be able to fire a shot, but also to know the design of weapons and military equipment and be able to carry out maintenance and repairs). Towed guns are cheaper, easier to manufacture, easier to operate and repair, lighter, easier to camouflage, and have better shooting accuracy (if the crew was not too lazy to secure the frames well and carried out the technical preparation correctly). And this is “offhand”! All artillery units are trained in counter-battery warfare and counter-fire maneuver - personnel decides everything! The creation of Malva and other “hybrids” is not a result of a good life. This is just an attempt to replace expensive armored self-propelled guns. When studying the performance characteristics of new self-propelled guns, the installed barrel immediately catches your eye. They are all pre-existing and designed to use existing ammunition. And further. Nobody talks about the tasks of specific systems. Why do you all want guns to fire at 70 km? And who will hit the JS and OS in direct contact? Why involve “MONSTERS” for this - self-propelled guns with expensive shells and charges. The most terrible weapon for infantry is a mortar, even an 82 mm one (high accuracy, the mine falls vertically - the maximum number of fragments in all directions from where they are shooting is not clear and it is impossible to look out, a good calculation starts a burst for up to 10 minutes and then quickly leaves the OP). Yes, long-range ones are needed, but there is no need to “cry” about it. Since the times of the USSR, everything has been balanced and, if possible, we will have more new and powerful weapons in our resources. No need to look at the "mattresses". They are used to driving Papuans through the desert without contact when they need it and where they need it. And the bastards know how to advertise their weapons.
  41. +1
    9 March 2024 07: 55
    Why are all the sofas playing so hard at maximum ranges? Cannon artillery is limited in cost/effectiveness to 20 km. Then only special ammunition with correction. With the price of a shot, like a house in the center of Moscow.
    If you need to throw a warhead 50+ km, then MLRS, glide bombs and drones will help. Their acceleration is smoother at the start, and the requirements for control systems are softer. And therefore CHEAPER.