Development of Soviet post-war anti-tank artillery

30
Development of Soviet post-war anti-tank artillery

After the end of World War II, our anti-tank artillery did not fully meet the requirements placed on it. The leadership of the Soviet Army was aware that in the current conditions, taking into account the growth of security of promising tanks The development and implementation of new anti-tank guns with increased power and the modernization of the remaining ones is required.

In the first post-war decade, a radical revision of the existing anti-tank artillery fleet was carried out, after which the 45-mm M-42 and 76-mm ZIS-3 guns began to be withdrawn from the PTA, and they were simultaneously replaced with modern models.



The 57 mm ZIS-2 and 100 mm BS-3 that remained in service were modernized. Thus, since 1957, in order to extend the service life and improve combat characteristics, the previously released ZIS-2 was upgraded to the ZIS-2N level with the ability to fight at night due to the use of APN-57 night sights and the introduction of UBR-271N sub-caliber projectiles into the ammunition loadout, which penetrated homogeneous armor up to 500 mm thick at a distance of 155 m. At 1 m, this projectile penetrated 000 mm armor normally.


Thanks to their high performance characteristics, the ZIS-2 anti-tank guns served for a long time in the Soviet Army and were used in the armed forces of friendly states.

The 100 mm field gun mod. 1944 was not forgotten either, although it did not fully meet the criteria of the PTA in a number of significant parameters. This artillery system was in production until 1951, and only 3 units were delivered.


Even taking into account the fact that in the 1950s–1970s a number of new, highly effective anti-tank artillery systems were created in our country, which had superiority over the BS-3 in terms of weight and armor penetration, the very bulky and heavy 100-mm gun with a rifled barrel remained in demand, thanks to the unification of shots with the D-10T tank gun, which armed the T-54 and T-55.

And also the ability to solve a wide range of tasks, including counter-battery combat, effectively destroy manpower and unarmored vehicles with high-explosive shells, destroy fortifications and various objects. Thanks to these qualities, the BS-3 is still fighting and is used by the opposing sides in the armed conflict in Ukraine.


Until the early 1960s, the BS-3 could fight any Western tanks. However, later the situation changed: 100-mm armor-piercing shells were not able to penetrate the frontal armor of the turret, the upper frontal armor of the British Chieftain tanks, as well as the American M-48A2 and M-60. Therefore, fin-stabilized cumulative (3BK17 and 3BK5) and subcaliber shells (3BM25 and 3BM8) were urgently developed and adopted into service.

The subcaliber shells penetrated the M-48A2 armor from any direction, as well as the Chieftain and M-60 turrets, but did not penetrate the upper frontal armor of these tanks. The cumulative shells were capable of penetrating any armor of all three tanks. The ammunition load also included a round with an O-412 fragmentation grenade, which, with a mass of 15,94 kg, had an initial velocity of 898 m/s and a range of more than 21 m.

After the appearance of new anti-tank guns: the rifled 85-mm D-48 with an increased muzzle velocity and the 100-mm smoothbore T-12 and MT-12, and the saturation of combat units with them, the BS-3 was gradually withdrawn from the troops and transferred to storage.

However, in the mid-1980s, an attempt was made to improve the anti-tank capabilities of the hopelessly outdated artillery system by that time. The BS-3 ammunition load included a 100-mm guided anti-tank projectile 9M117 (Bastion complex) with an effective firing range of up to 4 meters and armor penetration at normal of 000 mm. But by that time, there were only a few BS-550 guns left in combat units, and it can be said that the funds for experimental design work on modernization were wasted.

From the second half of the 1940s to the end of the 1970s, the Soviet Union developed towed anti-tank artillery systems, some of which entered service.

In this publication, experimental and serial anti-tank guns will be considered in ascending order of caliber.

Experimental 45-mm anti-tank gun M-5


As tank protection increased, the caliber of anti-tank guns increased, which inevitably led to an increase in the mass of artillery systems. This, in turn, made camouflage more difficult, worsened mobility, and required the use of mechanized transporters with increased traction. Quite naturally, the military wanted to have anti-tank guns of small weight and dimensions, but at the same time possessing acceptable armor penetration.

Within the framework of this concept, in 1945, the 172-mm M-45 gun with a supporting shield was designed in the design bureau of Plant No. 5. The design of the gun resembled the design of the German 75/55-mm 7,5 cm Pak. 41.


7,5 cm Pack. 41

The German 7,5 cm Pak. 41 gun had a conical bore, which allowed for a very significant increase in the initial velocity of the projectile, which, in combination with the APFSDS with a tungsten core, allowed for an armor penetration that was unprecedented at that time. But the conical barrel was very difficult to manufacture, and the Soviet industry could not establish mass production of such barrels, but they decided to try out the idea of ​​a supporting shield.

A ball mask with sighting devices, guidance mechanisms and sliding frames were mounted on the shield. The axle shafts were torsion-sprung, and the wheels were borrowed from a motorcycle. As a result, the weight of the gun was 493 kg. For comparison, the serial 45-mm M-42 gun in the combat position weighed 625 kg.


45 mm gun M-5

The silhouette of the M-5 gun was extremely low, the height of the firing line was 570 mm. The M-5 design became simpler and more technologically advanced in comparison with the existing 45 mm gun. The wedge vertical semi-automatic breech and the barrel from the M-42 provided the same rate of fire and ballistic characteristics of the serial "forty-five".

But, despite its advantage over the serial M-42, in 1945 the 45 mm M-5 gun no longer met the requirements for armor penetration, and therefore it was not accepted into service.

Experimental and small-scale production 57-mm anti-tank guns


In the first post-war years, two types of new 57-mm anti-tank guns were designed and built in metal, which were supposed to replace the ZIS-2.

As part of the technical assignment of the Main Artillery Directorate to create a lighter-weight weapon with the ballistics and ammunition of the ZIS-2, the design bureau of Perm Plant No. 172 developed the 1946-mm M-57-16 cannon in 2.

Due to the use of extremely lightweight parts and a highly effective muzzle brake, the weight of the M-16-2 gun in the firing position was only 797 kg – approximately 250 kg lighter than the ZIS-2.


57mm gun M-16-2

During test firing at the range, insufficient strength of the lower and upper mounts, unreliable operation of the trigger mechanism and bolt, unsatisfactory operation of the recoil device and poor stability were revealed. Based on the results of the tests, specialists decided that this system had no prospects, and its modification was considered inappropriate.

Another model, which was supposed to replace the ZIS-2, was created in 1946 by the Design Bureau of Gorky Plant No. 92. The gun, known as the LB-3, weighed only 818 kg.


57mm LB-3 gun

During test firings that took place in late autumn 1946, the 57 mm LB-3 gun was found to have unreliable breech operation, and there were also failures of the aiming mechanism. After which the gun was rejected.

At about the same time as the M-16-2 and LB-3 tests, other 57-mm guns were tested. Thus, the 57-mm S-15 gun, designed at the TsAKB under the supervision of V. G. Grabin, was tested at the Rzhev artillery range. During the tests, insufficient stability was revealed when firing at low elevation angles and there were failures in the semiautomatic system.

In 1948, the Votkinsk Plant Design Bureau No. 235 presented a modernized version of the ZIS-2, which is known under the factory index V-22.


57mm gun B-22

Externally, the B-22 differs from the ZIS-2 in the shape of the shield. I was unable to find any detailed information about this weapon. It is only known that the military did not find any particular advantages in the B-22 over the serially produced 57-mm model.

Perhaps the greatest success in the creation of a new lightweight 57-mm gun was achieved by the OKBL-46 team, headed by E. V. Charnko.


57mm gun Ch-26

The Ch-26 gun partly copied the design of the 7,5 cm Pak. 41, and the functions of the lower mount were performed by a supporting shield made of two sheets 3 and 4 mm thick. The upper mount was mounted in the middle of the shield. The upper mount had recoil devices installed, which included a hydraulic recoil brake and a spring recuperator, similar in design to that used on the M-42, but with larger dimensions. A rifled 57 mm barrel was installed in the cradle.

The total length of the barrel with muzzle brake was 4 mm, including 584 mm of rifled section. The efficiency of the muzzle brake reached 3%. The weight of the gun in the firing position was 244 kg. The rate of fire was up to 70 rounds/min.

The Ch-26 prototype underwent field testing in July–September 1947. Upon completion, the commission recommended that the gun be allowed to undergo military testing after the design flaws had been eliminated. By 1950, 26 guns had been produced and distributed among 5 military districts. Feedback from the troops was favorable, and the gun was deemed suitable for serial production.

However, the production volumes were small; in 1951, Plant No. 106 delivered a batch of 100 Ch-26 guns. By that time, the troops had a sufficient number of ZIS-2s, and the 57-mm caliber could no longer be considered sufficient for the new mass anti-tank weapon.

Serial and experimental 85-mm guns


During the Great Patriotic War, the Red Army was armed with 85-mm anti-aircraft guns, as well as tanks and self-propelled guns with 85-mm guns, which demonstrated quite satisfactory characteristics when firing at German armored vehicles.

In addition, 85-mm shells were significantly superior to 76-mm grenades in destructive and fragmentation effects, and work on 85-mm towed guns, which could be used as anti-tank and divisional guns, began in 1943. However, due to the high workload of artillery design bureaus with other projects and the intense production plan of artillery factories, it was possible to test and bring the new guns to serial production only in the post-war period.

The 85 mm cannon, designed under the direction of F. F. Petrov in the design bureau at Plant No. 9, turned out to be quite successful. This artillery system was well suited for mass production. Welding, stamping, casting and calibrated rolling were widely used.


85 mm D-44 cannon

By eliminating the front part, it was possible to reduce the weight of the system as a whole. The mass in the combat position is 1 ​​kg. Length – 725 m. The height of the firing line is 8,340 mm. The horizontal aiming sector is 825°. The vertical aiming angles: from –54° to +7°.

The standard means of traction was initially the all-wheel drive GAZ-63 truck, and then the GAZ-66 with a transportation speed on asphalt of up to 60 km/h. To roll the gun into position, a crew of 7 people placed a special roller under the trunk of the gun, secured in the traveling position and transported on frames.

The ammunition load included unitary loading rounds with various projectiles: armor-piercing subcaliber, cumulative, high-explosive fragmentation and smoke. The BR-365 armor-piercing tracer projectile weighing 9,2 kg leaves the 4 mm long barrel with an initial velocity of 685 m/s and at a distance of 800 m at an angle of 500° is capable of penetrating an armor plate 90 mm thick.

The BR-367P armor-piercing tracer projectile weighing 4,99 kg has an initial velocity of 1 m/s and penetrates 050 mm of armor at a range of 1 m at normal angles. The UO-000 fragmentation grenade weighs 110 kg, the maximum table range is 367 m.

At a barrel elevation angle of +20° with aiming correction, the rate of fire reaches 15 rounds/min, at an angle of 0° – up to 13 rounds/min. Maximum rate of fire – up to 22 rounds/min.


From 1946 to 1954, the plant 9 (“Uralmash”) produced 10 918 guns at the factory.

The D-44 was in service with a separate anti-tank artillery division of a motorized rifle or tank regiment (two anti-tank artillery batteries with two firing platoons) with 6 units per battery (12 guns per division). After 20 years of active use, a large number of D-44 guns were put into storage, considering them as a reserve in case of a major war.

Soviet 85-mm guns in feature films about the Great Patriotic War were often depicted as outwardly similar German 7,5 cm Pak. 40 anti-tank guns, and this gave incompetent people a reason to claim that Soviet cadre divisions in the 1970s were armed with German 75-mm anti-tank guns, which by that time had completely lost their relevance.

Beginning in 1957, some of the guns designated D-44N were equipped with 1PN3 night sights. A self-propelled modification of the SD-44 was also developed, 359 of which were produced, which could move on the battlefield without a tractor. In addition to the Soviet Army, such guns were supplied to Warsaw Pact countries.


The SD-44 barrel and carriage were taken from the D-44 with minor changes. A 72 hp M-14 motorcycle engine was installed on one of the gun's frames, providing a speed of up to 25 km/h on a good road. Power was transmitted from the engine via a cardan shaft, differential, and axle shafts to both wheels of the gun. The gearbox, which is part of the transmission, provided six forward gears and two reverse gears. A seat for one of the crew members, who served as the driver, was also fixed to the frame.

In the first half of the 1950s, 85 mm D-44 guns began to replace 76 mm divisional ZIS-3s, and the fight against tanks was assigned to more powerful artillery systems, and later to ATGMs.


As a divisional weapon, the weapon was used in many conflicts that took place in the CIS, including the North Caucasus and the North Military District. A Chinese copy of the D-44, known as the Type 56, was produced in large quantities and was distributed in third world countries.

Based on the D-44, under the supervision of chief designer F. F. Petrov, the anti-tank 85-mm gun D-48 was created.


85mm D-48 gun

The main feature of the D-48 was its exceptionally long barrel, which was increased to 74 calibers to ensure maximum muzzle velocity. The recoil devices, lifting and rotating mechanisms are similar to those of the D-44. The breech and semiautomatic mechanism were taken from the more powerful 100 mm BS-3 cannon. The lower carriage mount was also redesigned. Due to the unique shape of the muzzle brake, the gun was nicknamed "Pepper Shaker" or "Salt Shaker" by the troops.

New unitary shots with increased power were created especially for this gun. An armor-piercing projectile at a distance of 1 m penetrated armor up to 000 mm thick at an angle of 185°. A subcaliber projectile at a distance of 60 m under the same conditions penetrates homogeneous armor up to 1 mm thick. The maximum firing range of a high-explosive fragmentation projectile weighing 000 kg is 220 m.

The D-48 used exclusive ammunition that was not suitable for other 85mm caliber guns. The D-48 ammunition set prohibited the use of rounds from the D-44, 85mm anti-aircraft and tank guns - this significantly narrowed the scope of application of the gun.

In 1955–1957, Plant No. 75 in Yurga produced 819 D-48 and D-48N (with APN2-77 or APN3-77 night sights), which, having supplanted the D-44, were used in anti-tank divisions until the late 1970s. These guns could still be found in storage 20 years ago. However, due to the use of unique ammunition, almost all of them have already been written off.

The design team of F. F. Petrov managed to beat competitors in creating 85-mm towed guns. In the late 1940s, the ZIS-S-8 and BL-25 anti-tank guns also participated in the competition for this caliber.

The ZIS-S-8 cannon was created by the TsAKB under the direction of V. G. Grabin. It was developed for ammunition of the 85-mm anti-aircraft cannon 52-K mod. 1939 and had the same ballistics. A total of five samples were manufactured at Plant No. 92.


85mm ZIS-S-8 gun

The gun's weight in the firing position is 1 kg. Barrel length is 765 mm. Firing sector is 4°. Elevation angles: from –650° to +55°. Maximum firing range is 5 m. Crew: 30 people. The gun could be transported at a speed of up to 15 km/h.

The 85 mm ZIS-S-8 gun was tested at the end of 1943. 720 shots were fired, but during the firing a number of problems were revealed: insufficient strength and reliability of the muzzle brake, as well as its strong impact on the gun crew, unreliable extraction of the cartridge case and poor functioning of the recoil devices during prolonged firing, unsatisfactory operation of the lifting mechanism. The process of eliminating the shortcomings was delayed, and the development of the ZIS-S-8 was stopped after the adoption of the D-44.

The 85-mm anti-tank gun BL-25 was designed in the Design Bureau of Perm Plant No. 172 under the supervision of M. Yu. Its design included parts of 85-mm anti-aircraft and tank guns that had already been tested in production. The barrel and ballistics were borrowed from the 85-mm anti-aircraft gun model 1939, and the breech and semiautomatic mechanism were taken entirely from the 85-mm tank gun ZIS-S-53 model 1944.


85mm BL-25 gun

The mass in the combat position was 1 kg. The maximum firing range at an elevation angle of 620° was 30 m. The rate of fire was up to 12 rounds/min. The crew consisted of 170 people. The speed of movement was up to 20 km/h.

In January 1945, the BL-25 was delivered to the Rzhev artillery range. During firing, the gun demonstrated poor reliability and low durability. Due to numerous breakdowns, it was sent for revision, which was never completed.

The 85A2 Zhalo-B towed smoothbore gun, created in the late 55s at the Burevestnik Central Research Institute, stands apart from other 1970-mm anti-tank guns.


85 mm gun 2A55 "Zhalo-B"

At the design stage, a high rate of fire was envisaged – up to 25 rounds/min. The main ammunition was a sub-caliber fin-stabilized armor-piercing projectile. The gun had a very powerful muzzle brake, providing a 70% recoil reduction. The gun carriage was planned to be made of titanium alloys; according to the technical specifications, its weight should not exceed 900 kg. The prototype with a steel carriage in the combat position weighed about 1 kg.

Following the tests, the Zhalo-B was not recommended for adoption into service. Although the weapon had a number of positive qualities, it could not reliably penetrate the frontal armor of American and British tanks, being inferior in armor penetration to existing 100-125-mm Soviet smoothbore guns.

100-mm experimental and serial anti-tank guns


Simultaneously with the development of the 122-mm howitzer D-30 using a carriage of the same design in the late 1950s, the 100-mm anti-tank gun D-60 was created for ammunition of the tank gun D-10T and the towed BS-3.


100mm D-60 gun

Apparently, at the design stage, the possibility of adopting a duplex of a 122 mm howitzer and a 100 mm gun was considered. A great advantage of a gun with such a carriage was the possibility of all-round fire. But after testing, this was abandoned, considering the new 122 mm howitzer to be quite universal. In addition, the 100 mm rifled gun weighing about 3 kg was inferior in armor penetration to promising smoothbore anti-tank guns.

In 1957, serial production of the 100-mm smoothbore T-12 Rapira gun began. It was created in the design bureau of the Yurginsky Machine-Building Plant No. 75 under the leadership of V. Ya. Afanasyev and L. V. Korneev by attaching a smoothbore barrel to the D-48 carriage.


100 mm T-12 "Rapier" gun

The idea was that in a smooth bore it is possible to create a much higher gas pressure than in a rifled bore, and accordingly increase the initial velocity of the projectile. A smooth bore gun has a much higher barrel life, and there is no need to worry about the so-called "washing out" of the rifling fields when a certain velocity is reached.

It was also possible to increase armor penetration by introducing non-rotating cumulative projectiles. In a rifled gun, the rotation of the projectile due to the "splashing" of the cumulative jet reduces the armor-piercing effect. The problem with stabilizing the projectile on the trajectory was solved by using a fin that opened after departure.

The T-12 cannon bore consists of a chamber and a cylindrical smooth-walled guide section. The chamber is formed by two long and one short (between them) cones. The transition from the chamber to the cylindrical section is a conical slope. The breech is vertical wedge with a spring semiautomatic mechanism.

In combat position, the T-12 weighs 2 kg. Barrel length is 750 mm. Total length is 6 m. Horizontal guidance sector is 126°. Vertical: from –9,5° to +54°.

To combat armored targets, an armor-piercing discarding sabot projectile weighing 4,55 kg was used. Having left the barrel with an initial velocity of 1 m/s, it is capable of penetrating 575 mm of armor at a distance of 1 meters. The ammunition also includes cumulative and high-explosive fragmentation projectiles. Firing range is 000 m. Rate of fire is up to 215 rounds/min. Crew - 8 people. Transportation of T-500 and MT-14 guns is most often carried out by a standard MT-LB tractor or three-axle Ural-7D and Ural-12 trucks at a speed of up to 12 km/h. When rolling the gun manually, a roller is placed under the trunk part of the frame, which is secured with a stopper on the left frame.

During military operation, it became clear that the D-48 carriage was too weak for a 100 mm barrel, which is why in the late 1960s, the MT-1970 artillery system was created and launched into serial production in 12 on a more convenient and durable carriage, which is also called the "Rapier".


The T-12 and MT-12 guns have the same warhead - a long thin 60-caliber barrel with a muzzle brake - "Salt Cellar". A significant difference of the modernized MT-12 model is that it is equipped with a torsion bar suspension, which is locked during firing to ensure stability.

Compared to the T-12, the modernized MT-12 has become slightly heavier - the mass in the combat position is 3 kg, and the main means of traction is also the MT-LB. The main combat characteristics remained at the level of the T-100.


In the 1980s, a number of innovations were introduced to update the combat potential of towed anti-tank artillery. Thus, some of the guns, designated MT-12K, used in anti-tank divisions in the western direction, were equipped with the 9K116 "Kastet" ATGM equipment, in which the missile was guided by a laser beam.


The 100 mm ATGM 9M117, also used for launching from the barrels of modernized T-55 and T-62 tanks, can hit targets at a range of up to 4 m. The missile weighs 000 kg. Armor penetration is up to 17,6 mm.

A number of MT-12R guns were also equipped with the 1A31 Ruta radar sighting system, which was produced until 1990.


The radar system used on the MT-12R allowed for a sharp increase in the probability of hitting a target regardless of the conditions of visual visibility: at any time of day, in fog, and in heavy smoke and dust. The radar operated as a detection station and a high-precision rangefinder, and the built-in ballistic computer calculated the data for firing.

MT-12 guns were supplied to Warsaw Pact countries, Algeria, Iraq and Yugoslavia, and also went to many former Soviet republics and are still used in combat. During armed conflicts, 100-mm anti-tank guns were mainly used not against tanks, but as divisional or corps guns.

125 mm anti-tank gun 2A45M "Sprut-B"


In the late 1960s, information appeared about the development of a new generation of Western tanks with multi-layer armor, and it became clear that the towed anti-tank guns available in the troops at that time would not be able to reliably combat them in the future.

In connection with this, at the beginning of 1968, OKB-9 (now part of JSC Spetstekhnika) began to create a powerful anti-tank gun with the ballistics of the 125-mm smoothbore tank gun D-81.

The task turned out to be quite difficult, since the D-81, having excellent ballistics, gave a very strong recoil. On a tank weighing 40 tons, the recoil was dealt with thanks to the use of powerful recoil devices, but during the field tests, the 125-mm tank gun fired from the tracked carriage of the 203-mm B-4 howitzer. It is clear that such an anti-tank gun weighing 17 tons was out of the question.

The designers took a number of measures to compensate for the recoil: the recoil was increased from 340 mm (limited by the tank's dimensions) to 970 mm and a powerful muzzle brake was used. This made it possible to install a 125 mm cannon on a three-frame carriage from a serial 122 mm howitzer D-30, allowing for all-round fire.


125 mm anti-tank gun 2A45M "Sprut-B"

Considering that the towed gun weighed over 6 kg in combat position, it was made self-propelled to improve maneuverability on the battlefield, equipped with a 500 hp carburetor power unit. The speed of movement on its own power unit is 39 km/h, the fuel range is up to 10 km. When towing by mechanized traction means - up to 50 km/h.

The 2A45M gun is equipped with a mechanized system for converting from the combat to the marching position and back, which consists of a hydraulic jack and hydraulic cylinders. Using the jack, the gun carriage was raised to the height necessary for spreading or bringing the frames together, and then lowered to the ground. The hydraulic cylinders raise the gun to maximum clearance, as well as raise and lower the wheels.


The gun weighs 6 kg. Elevation angles: from -575° to +6°. Rate of fire: up to 25 rounds/min. Crew: 8 people.

The ammunition load of the Sprut-B gun includes separate-case loading rounds, originally created for 125-mm tank guns: with cumulative, sub-caliber and high-explosive fragmentation projectiles. The Sprut-B can also fire Reflex-M anti-tank missiles (range up to 5 m) with armor penetration of 000 mm against homogeneous armor and 850 mm against armor with dynamic protection. The maximum firing range of a high-explosive fragmentation projectile is 750 m.

The leadership of the USSR Ministry of Defense could not decide for a long time whether it needed such a powerful and heavy non-self-propelled anti-tank artillery system, and the 125-mm 2A45M Sprut-B gun was accepted into service only in 1988. However, few of them were built; according to reference data, the customer accepted 24 guns.
30 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. -1
    25 September 2024 06: 06
    When, after the SVO, they publish a report on the types of tank damage, artillery as a whole will be in last place, and towed anti-tank guns, if they exist, will be isolated cases.
    The article is interesting. It seems to be history, but it also gives some understanding of why towed artillery and anti-tank guns in particular are about to disappear as a class at this point in history.
    1. BAI
      +3
      25 September 2024 08: 48
      Based on the chronicle, we can calculate approximate statistics on the defeat of Ukrainian armored vehicles: minefields 30%, ATGM - 18%, Lancet - 13%, FPV - 9%, artillery 10%, VKS 9%, RPG-SPG - 11%.
    2. +10
      25 September 2024 09: 59
      Quote: dzvero
      When, after the SVO, they publish a report on the types of tank damage, artillery as a whole will be in last place, and towed anti-tank guns, if they exist, will be isolated cases.

      At the initial stage of the fighting, most of our armored vehicles were disabled by 122-152 mm HE shells and 120 mm mortar shells, as well as ATGMs. Now the balance has shifted towards FPV drones and anti-tank mines.
      Quote: dzvero
      It also gives some understanding of why towed artillery and anti-tank guns in particular are about to disappear as a class at this point in history.

      New towed antitank guns have not been developed since the late 1960s, the 125mm stands apart, and very few of these guns were produced. But self-propelled tank destroyers, also capable of providing fire support to infantry, firing from closed positions and being used as light tanks, are not going away anytime soon.
      1. +2
        25 September 2024 13: 09
        exactly, they are very good in defense and much better than a rifle in point offensive.
    3. +3
      25 September 2024 19: 00
      Well, non-self-propelled anti-tank guns will disappear - they are too vulnerable and at the ranges at which they can hit a target they have too many competitors, the same ATGMs, with a smaller crew, more maneuverable and easier to camouflage.
      But towed artillery will still serve. They are effective for work from the depths of the enemy's forward edge, and most importantly, they already exist and there are many of them... If artillery units are equipped with their own reconnaissance UAVs, at the proper level, then the effectiveness of such systems will remain high for a long time...
      Mortars won't go anywhere either and will outlive this artillery...
  2. +9
    25 September 2024 06: 35
    Cool article. drinks

    A significant difference of the modernized MT-12 model is that it is equipped with a torsion bar suspension, which is locked during firing to ensure stability..

    The main difference between the T-12 and the MT-12 is the replacement of the balancing mechanism from spring to hydraulic. wink
    1. +6
      25 September 2024 10: 02
      Quote: MMM-642
      Cool article drinks

      Thank you! drinks
      Quote: MMM-642
      A significant difference of the modernized MT-12 model is that it is equipped with a torsion bar suspension, which is locked during firing to ensure stability.

      The main difference between the T-12 and the MT-12 is the replacement of the balancing mechanism from spring to hydraulic.


      Essential visible The distinctive feature of the modernized MT-12 model is that it is equipped with a torsion bar suspension. Yes
      1. +1
        25 September 2024 11: 25
        Quote: Bongo
        A significant visible difference

        And you don't have to bend over smile
  3. +6
    25 September 2024 08: 26
    Interesting article. Respect to the author.
  4. +4
    25 September 2024 09: 35
    Sergey, thank you, as always - clear, precise and literary hi
    1. +6
      25 September 2024 10: 03
      Quote: novel xnumx
      Sergey, thank you, as always - clear, precise and literary hi

      Roman, thank you for your kind words! drinks An article about the Soviet post-war self-propelled anti-tank gun is planned.
      1. +8
        25 September 2024 11: 20
        I join the positive reviews of Sergey's article! As always, high-quality work that evokes only good emotions!!!
        However, I will allow myself to disagree with him on one point.
        The BS-3 ammunition complement included a 100-mm guided anti-tank projectile 9M117 (Bastion complex) with an effective firing range of up to 4 meters and armor penetration at normal of 000 mm. But by that time, there were only a few BS-550 guns left in combat units, and it can be said that the funds for experimental design work on modernization were wasted.

        Research on the Bastion program primarily allowed for the creation of a design reserve in case of a major war. And not for 100mm towed artillery, but for T-55 tanks. Let me remind you that the latter were “stamped” in Omsk until 1985!
        Have a nice day everyone, success and prosperity!
        1. +7
          25 September 2024 11: 56
          Vladislav, hello!
          Quote: Kote pane Kohanka
          Let me remind you that the latter were “stamped” in Omsk until 1985!

          They were produced. Yes But after the start of production of the T-64, T-72 and T-80, the T-55 tanks were supplied only for export and without a guided weapons system.
          Quote: Kote pane Kohanka
          I will allow myself to disagree with him at one point...


          As already mentioned, in the mid-1980s, there were no BS-3 guns in combat units, with the exception of 18 pools on the Kuril Islands and fortified areas on the Soviet-Chinese border - i.e. there was no point in equipping the BS-3 with guided munitions. As for the guns themselves, in the early 1990s I saw mothballed BS-3s along with ZIS-3s and M-30s in the 5505th BHVT located in the village of Tayozhny near Komsomolsk.

          P.S. Please take a look at the photo of the twin ZPU that you were doing when visiting the "Dekabrist".
      2. +2
        25 September 2024 12: 10
        I can't wait!!
        Ttttttttt
      3. Alf
        +4
        25 September 2024 18: 58
        Quote: Bongo
        An article about the Soviet post-war self-propelled anti-tank gun is planned.

        The field is mostly undug, we are waiting impatiently.
      4. +3
        25 September 2024 22: 12
        Quote: Bongo
        An article about the Soviet post-war self-propelled anti-tank gun is planned.

        Very interesting topic, we will wait!
  5. The comment was deleted.
  6. UAT
    0
    25 September 2024 18: 59
    Dear author, you write
    A motorcycle engine M-72 with a capacity of 14 hp is installed.
    I am sure that all modifications of the M-72 had an engine more powerful than 20 hp.
  7. Alf
    +3
    25 September 2024 19: 01
    According to reference data, the customer accepted 24 guns.

    About 20 years ago, on May 9, an Sprut-B was rolled out onto the square in Samara, and I was surprised at how low it was.
  8. +1
    25 September 2024 23: 28
    Access to German optical systems was a great help in the development of post-war artillery; the quality of direct-fire sights, as well as other optics, improved many times over. Unique natural conditions (Jena, GDR) and proven technologies also worked for our accuracy.
  9. -2
    26 September 2024 13: 40
    An armor-piercing projectile at a distance of 1 m penetrated armor up to 000 mm thick at an angle of 185°. A subcaliber projectile at a distance of 60 m under the same conditions penetrates homogeneous armor up to 1 mm thick.
    As far as I know, an armor-piercing projectile at a distance of 1 m penetrated armor up to 000 mm thick at an impact angle of 185°, and at an impact angle of 90° - only 90 mm.
    And this gun didn't have a sub-caliber projectile at all. Although it had a cumulative one, which penetrated 300 mm at a normal angle and 192 mm at an angle of 60°. Correct me if I'm wrong.
  10. PXL
    -2
    26 September 2024 14: 36
    Almost everything is copied from the books of a certain Shirokorad A. B.) And where is it about recoilless rifles? B-8, B-10... Well, okay, the SG-82, SG-122 and SPG-9 were considered easel-mounted grenade launchers, but the B-guns were guns. And where did the 37-mm airborne gun ChK-M go after WWII?
    1. +1
      26 September 2024 20: 52
      https://topwar.ru/250178-sostojanie-sovetskoj-protivotankovoj-artillerii-posle-okonchanija-velikoj-otechestvennoj-vojny.html
      Maybe because this article is called: DEVELOP Soviet post-war anti-tank artillery. And here is a link where you can read about the Cheka-M. The author is the same, by the way, surprisingly.
      1. PXL
        0
        26 September 2024 21: 52
        But weren’t recoilless weapons one of the paths of post-war DEVELOPMENT of anti-tank artillery?
        1. +2
          26 September 2024 22: 19
          Personally, I have no idea, because I am not a big expert on artillery. But it seems to me that after having had a taste of Kurchevsky's guns in the pre-war years, they were somewhat skeptical. Of course, you can include the SPG here, but that was a long time ago. And the recoilless rifles are more of a grenade launcher than artillery. But that's more of a question of terminology.
      2. PXL
        0
        26 September 2024 22: 06
        I read about the CHK-M1. Thank you!
  11. +1
    29 September 2024 14: 20
    Thanks to the author for the article. The excursion into history is quite interesting. I practically used the BS-3 as part of an artillery battery in the Far East. A good weapon. Some were manufactured in 1944. MT-LBV tractors. They coped with the tasks with flying colors.
    1. +1
      1 October 2024 06: 24
      Hello!
      If it’s not a secret, in what years did you serve in the Far East and where?
      1. +1
        1 October 2024 21: 37
        Hello! Late 80s early 90s. Primorye, Kuril Islands.
        1. +1
          Yesterday, 09: 43
          In the early 90s, I served in the 11th Air Defense Army and traveled a lot around Primorsky and Khabarovsk Krai, as well as the Jewish Autonomous Region. I visited fortified areas on the border. I also had the chance to visit Iturup and Kunashir.
          1. 0
            Yesterday, 15: 45
            Wonderful places. I still dream about them. Ussuriysk (Baranovsky). Vladik, of course. Kuril Islands - I was on Shikotan and Kunashir (I watched the yaps from Cape Veslo), but the main ones are Iturup. Gorny, Goryachiye Klyuchi, Kitovy, Kurilsk.