Military Review

An alternative to mortar?

38
The battalion artillery appeared during the First World War, as infantry escort artillery, designed to suppress the suddenly appeared machine guns and other open and covered fire weapons of the enemy, which often suddenly came to life in the depths of his defense and frustrated the incoming troops with their fire, disrupting the offensive. With the advent of the battlefield tanksBattalion artillery also received a second task - the fight against enemy armored forces at short range both in defense and in offensive.


German light infantry gun leIG 18 in battle. 1943


It is clear that to solve these problems it was impossible to use only one weapon, since the fight against tanks demanded a rapid-fire weapon with a high initial velocity of the projectile, which was necessary to break through the vertical armor. At that time, the task of working on the firing points required the gun to fire at a hinged trajectory with a relatively powerful high-explosive fragmentation grenade.

Two trunks tried to unite on one gun carriage before the war in almost all countries, but some successful constructions made the weather on the artillery front.

Therefore, despite the attractiveness of such a solution, the universal gun did not find wide application and was finally replaced by two guns - a light anti-tank gun and a howitzer, or mortar, replaced by a mortar in a number of countries.

Battalion anti-tank guns were covered in our press quite often, although not fully. But the battalion mounted implements wholesale (mortars and howitzers) in our literature almost no attention was paid. Let's try to fill this gap.

The main requirements for battalion cannons of mounted fire were as little weight as possible in combat (so that the gun could roll over the battlefield by little or no small crew), powerful high-explosive fragmentation projectile weighing at least 4 kg and the greatest range of artillery firing - to 2,5 -3 km.

The main units of the German infantry weapon leIG 16 (illustration wi manual for use in Russian).
1 - handle raising / lowering the breech breech; 2 - the descent handle; 3 - fastener stopper for hiking; 4 - drummer cap; 5 - communication and breech of the sled; 6 - ejector tabs; 7 - left spring; 8 - the head of the holder of the axis of the descent handle; 9 - the level covering the platform for the control level: 10 - gunner; 11 - aiming arrow; 12 - platform for the control level; 13 - derivation adjustment mechanism drum; 14 - handwheel for setting aiming angles; 15 - spindle (pear) of the lifting mechanism of the sight.


Despite the active development of mortars, in the prewar period, in many countries, they also paid great attention to special battalion mortars / howitzers, which were designed to complement mortars. Let's get acquainted with them in more detail.

In Germany, each infantry regiment had an artillery company as part of six 7,5-cm light infantry guns arr. 18 (Ie.IG 18) and two 15-cm heavy infantry guns arr. 33 (S.1.G.33). Moreover, the light guns swooped out in two battalions of the regiment.

7,5-cm light infantry gun entered service with the German army in 1927, and was used until the end of the war.

Features of the device guns. The barrel is a monoblock, connected to a sled with the help of two trunnions located in the muzzle of the barrel and serving as an axis of rotation when raising and lowering the breech block.

General view of the German light infantry gun leIG 18.


The gun had no congestion in the usual sense. All mechanisms necessary for the production of a shot and ejection of a spent cartridge case are assembled in the back connection of the sled. The throwing out of the liner and loading took place when the breech breech was raised, in the manner of a hunting rifle - “breaking”.

The recoil device did not participate in the rollback. Hydropneumatic knurled fit to the cradle on the right. On the left there was a hydraulic brake recoil spun type.

Lifting gear sector type. With horizontal hovering, the machine slid along the combat axis. Spring balancing mechanism. Laet podressore.

XIUMUM-cm light infantry cannon data leIG 7,5
Caliber, mm75
Barrel length, m / klb885/11,3
The length of the threaded part, m85,6
Angle VN deg-10+ 75 hail
Angle GN degree11 hail
Rollback length, mm maximum500
Minimal480
Dimensions in the stowed position, mm2750 length
width 1600
height 1200
System weight, kg:
in the stowed position with limber and calculation1560
in a fighting position 400
Rate of fire, rds / min 12


The gun could be transported with or without a front end. In the latter case, it was carried in a one-box harness, and on the battlefield - by gun crew on the straps. If necessary, the gun could be disassembled and transported on packs.

Charging separately-sleeve, brass or steel brass sleeve. There are five charges.

Punching ability of high-explosive fragmentation grenade arr. 18 on charges No. 1 — No. 3 and the setting of the detonators for deceleration — is such that it breaks through a light field shelter with a thickness of up to 1, and with charges No. 4. and No. 5 - brick and concrete walls with thickness up to 25 see. When a grenade breaks (angle of incidence is less than 25 °), the fragments fly apart to the sides - 20 m, forward - 6м, backwards - 3 m, when the grenade breaks after a ricochet up to 10 m scattering of fragments to the sides — 12 m, forward — 10 m, back — 5 m.

In addition to this, the guns in the German regiments also had 150-mm "heavy infantry guns", which entered service in 1933.

The barrel of the gun consisted of a pipe-monoblock and breech, fortified with a connecting nut. Horizontal wedge gate. Lifting gear sector type. With horizontal hovering, the frontal part of the machine slid along the combat axis.

Box-type single-gang machine. Suspension torsion. Aluminum alloy wheels, with guns carried by mechtyag, solid rubber tires were put on the wheels.

The guns are very interesting, but deserve a separate description and their история omitted here.

In Japan, the 30-ies in the infantry infantry regiment was part of an artillery division, consisting of two or four gun batteries, armed initially with 75-mm twin guns arr. 41 (1908).

75-mm Japanese mountain cannon arr. Xnumx


70-mm Japanese infantry howitzer arr. Xnumx


The infantry regiment had three battalions. Each battalion was given four 37-mm anti-tank guns and four 70-mm howitzers arr. 92 (1934).

In 1935, 75-mm mountain cannons arr. 41 and transferred to artillery rifle regiments. Instead, the mountain artillery regiments received a new material part - 75-mm howitzer guns arr. 94 (1934).

75-mm mountain cannon arr. The 41 had a piston valve, a hydraulic recoil brake and a spring-loaded thumb joint. The system was transported on wheels or on packs - 6 packs no more than 96 kg (each).

The 70-mm 92 infantry howitzer was put into service in 1934. It had a piston-bolt monoblock. The brake recoil hydraulic nakatnik spring. Carriage with sliding beds. Thanks to crankshafts, the trunk could be installed in two positions: high {for mounted shooting) and low (for flat shooting). Metal wheels. The howitzer was moved by horse gear or on 4 packs.

70-mm howitzer fired high-explosive fragmentation projectile weighing 3,83 kg, length 4,1 klb. BB weight - 0,6 kg.

 These 75-mm mountain cannon arr. XnumxThese 70-mm howitzer infantry arr. Xnumx
Caliber, mm7570
Barrel length, klb3116,1
HV angle, hail-8 degrees; + 41 degrees 
HV angle, low carriage + 51 hail
HV angle. on a high gun carriage + 83 hail
Angle GN, hail7 hail40 hail
The height of the line of fire, mm790700
Stroke, mm920 
Diameter of wheels, mm 700
System weight, kg:
in the stowed position with front1240 
in a fighting position680209
Barrel weight with bolt, kg 46
Rate of fire, rds / min+10+12
Projectile weight, kg4,584,58
Charge weight, kg0,267highest xnumx
Early projectile speed, m / s 380200
Maximum shooting range, m80002800


Since the beginning of the 20-s, the Soviet Union has paid increased, one might even say excessive, attention to battalion and regimental artillery. Dozens of projects and prototypes of battalion and regimental guns were created.

So in May 1929, the Revolutionary Military Council approved the artillery weapons system for 1929-1932, that is, for the 1 5th five-year plan.

The system envisaged the creation of an 76-mm mortar battalion weighing 75 (up to 200) kg, with HV angles - 0 gr; + 70 gr and GN - 20 gr. Projectile weight 4-6 kg. Range - 2 km.

The regiment was to receive an 76-mm howitzer, which had a weight in the combat position 500 kg and up to 800 kg - in the marching. HV angle - 5 gr; + 45 gr and GN 60 gr. Projectile weight 6-7 kg. Firing range 7-8 km. In addition, the regimental artillery was to receive an 122-mm mortar with a combat weight of 700-800 kg and a firing range of up to 5 km.


76-mm battalion howitzer 35-K.


As we see, the program envisaged the creation of effective weapons of the battalion-regiment level. We note that at that time priority was given to mounted-fire weapons. But, alas, this part of the program was failed miserably. None of the listed guns was adopted.

5.08.1933 The USSR Revolutionary Military Council approved the new system art. weapons on 1933-37 The system provided for the battalion to create 76-mm mortar guns weighing 140-150 kg with a range of 5-7 km,

For the regiment it was supposed to create an 76-mm regimental gun on a self-propelled gun with a range of 7-8 km, as well as 152-mm mortars on the 76-mm and 122-mm divisional guns. These items are the 1933-1937 program. also remained on paper.

Finally, in April 1938, a list of specimens of guns was compiled, which were included in the art. armament. The regiment was supposed to have an 45-mm anti-tank gun and an 76-mm regimental gun weighing 800 kg in a combat position and 1450 kg in a marching, with an HV angle of 8 g; + 05gr and the angle of the GN 60 g (with sliding beds) and the firing range to 10 km.

76-mm battalion howitzer


Needless to say, this regimental cannon was not put into service. But still about the "battalion"!

First, about the long-suffering 76-mm 35-K battalion howitzer, which was constructively very interesting.

The design of the 35-K was started in 1935 at plant number 8 under the direction of V.N. Sydorenko. It was intended to arm the mountain and airborne units, as well as a battalion cannon for the direct support of infantry.

9 mom 1936, the prototype was handed over to the military representative and transferred to field testing. The first test took place in May-June 1936. After 164 shots and 300 km of run, the howitzer went down and was returned to the factory.

The second test - September 1936 g. When firing, the frontal link burst, as there were no bolts holding the shield bracket to the frontal part. Someone apparently took out or forgot to put these bolts.

The third test - February 1937 g. Now no liquid was poured into the compressor cylinder. As a result, when shooting due to a strong blow of the trunk, the frontal part of the gaggle was deformed.

The fourth test - when shooting from a new experienced howitzer 23 in May 1937, breaking the spring of the tensioner. The reason - a blunder engineer in the drawing of the spindle of the compressor.

The fifth test, December 1937, was immediately tested on 9 35-K systems. Because of the shortages and throws when shooting at an angle of 0 hail, the commission decided that the test system could not stand it. There is a clear niggle, as all mountain tools had similar phenomena, for example, 7-2 and 7-6.

In total, by the beginning of 1937 g, 8 was made at 12 plant No. 76-mm 35-K howitzers. However, by that time, with many more profitable orders, the plant had lost all interest in 35-K.

At the beginning of 1937, all the works but the 35-K howitzer were moved from plant No. 8 to plant No. 7 (formerly Arsenal), which was given an order to manufacture 100 howitzers 35-K in 1937. But Arsenal did not want to do anything with the “alien” system.

Outraged 7 Sidorenko on April 1938 wrote a letter to the Artillery Directorate: “Plant No. 7 is not interested in finishing 35-K - it threatens him with gross outrage ... You (in the Directorate) 35-K are in charge of a department that is a staunch supporter of mortars and therefore, the enemy mortars ... "Further Sidorenko pointed out that during the testing of 35-K on the NIAP there was an elemental sabotage.

By the summer of 1938, three types of shots were worked out for 35-K and the design of the howitzer had to undergo slight changes. But at the end of 1938, for some reason, they decided to try the untranslated (factory No. 7 refused to rework) 35-K howitzer again squalls and unsatisfactory accuracy of shooting.

In a report from 16 in July 1939, ANNOP management stated that further work on 35-K was inappropriate. True, the gun was disassembled into 9 parts weighing from 35 to 30 kg. Thus, when disassembled, it could be transported not only on horse but also on human packs, which was considered particularly advantageous when used in the mountains.

The collapsible howitzer barrel consisted of a pipe, breech and lining. The breech easily screwed onto the pipe without a tool. The slope is constant. Eccentric piston lock.

The lifting mechanism had one sector. The rotation of the gun occurred when the machine was moved along the combat axis.

Brake recoil hydraulic spun type. Knuckle spring. The box carousel is single lumpy. He understood the frontal and trunk parts. When shooting from a trench, the trunk part was shot.

Sight from 76-mm gun arr. 1909 g., With changes that allowed to carry the shooting at angles up to + 80 gr.

Shield removable and foldable.

Crankshaft axle. Thanks to the rotation of the axis, it was possible to change the height of the line of fire: 570 mm and 750 mm.

Metal disc wheels with a truck. The front of the system is global.

Howitzer movement could be done in two ways:

a) on wheels in a double-hull harness with one horse or when it is harnessed in the straps of 4's calculation people;

b) on packs - 4-x horse or 9-and human (without ammunition).

The F-23 system was developed at the OKB Plant No. XXUMX under the direction of V. G. Grabin. Initially, according to the approved project, the F-92 should have been a universal system (gun howitzer), in which the 23-mm howitzer of reduced power, or the 76-mm anti-tank gun of the 45-K type could be used on a single gun carriage.

76-mm lightweight battalion howitzer F-23-II in a combat position. Barrel in a direct fire position.


76-mm lightweight battalion howitzer F-23-II in the stowed position.


Howitzer barrel - monoblock. There is no muzzle brake. Piston valve from 76-mm regimental gun arr. 1927 p. Two loading systems were developed: a unitary cartridge like a mountain cannon, 1909 G., and a separate cartridge case.

76-mm 35-K howitzer data
Trunk data
Caliber, mm76,2
Barrel length, mm / klb870/11,4
The length of the threaded part, mm645
Length of chamber, mm140
Volume of chambers, l0,31
The steepness of the groove, klb20
Number of rifling24
Cutting depth, mm0,7V
Cutting width, mm7,0
Field width, mm3,0
Weight, kg12
Barrel weight with bolt, kg91
 
Data mast
Vertical guidance angle, degrees: 
from a low axis on a long machine- 6 degrees 15 degrees; + 60 hail
from the high axis - // -- 1 degrees 40 degrees; + 64 grad 50 grad
from a high axis on a short machine+ 10 degrees45 degrees; + 83 hail
Corner horiz. guidance, hail- 3 degrees 30 degrees; + 4 grad 30 grad
Rollback length, mm: norms460
extreme470
Weight of fluid in the coil brake, kg0,91
The height of the line of fire, mm (on the low / high axis)750/570
Panorama eyepiece height, mm (on low / high axis)950/780
Length in firing position, mm: 
with short beds1580
with long beds2715
Horiz. distance from the coulter support to: 
axle axles, mm1570
wheel supports, mm1770
Combat height, mm: 
at 0 deg (on low / high axis)1245/1050
at max, angle (on low / high axis)1430/1225
Max length, in marching position, mm: 
with shafts3895
without shafts1590
System width, mm1220
Stroke, mm1080
Clearance, mm290
Height in the stowed position, mm1450
Wheel diameter, mm650
The number of windows on the wheel5
Shield thickness, mm3,5
 
Weight summary, kg:
Sliding parts: without stem5,92
with a trunk96,92
Swinging part: without stem49
with a trunk140
Carriage without trunk253
Shield35,6
Wheels2 19
System in a combat position344
- // - in walking position (with shafts)372 
 
Performance data
Wagon speed, km / h+6
The transition time from traveling to combat and back, with+30
Calculation, people5


The cannon barrel and ammunition are fully borrowed from the 19-K anti-tank gun.

The art system F-23-1 was manufactured by plant No. 92 from September to December 1936 of the year according to drawings of the design bureau of plant No. 92 according to the order of the CIDO of August 21 of the year.

The peculiarity of the design is that during the separation of the beds (the transition from the marching position and the combat position), the system with its pallet sinks to the ground. When moving to the stowed position, the system automatically chooses clearance when flattening. Angle of separation bedding 60 gr.

Beds of box section, riveted. For shooting in a trench, the bed shortened.

The brake recoil hydraulic nakatnik hydropneumatic. Rollback length is variable.

Lifting and balancing mechanism is connected in one cylinder, screw type, located above the cradle.

The rotary mechanism had a toothed sector attached to the lower machine.

Suspension system, metal wheels, rubberized,

The system was taken to equine horse packs.

76-mm lightweight battalion howitzer F-23-II in a combat position. The trunk at the position of the angle of greatest elevation.


The prototype F-23-I arrived from factory number 92 on the NIAP 15 January 1937. After 197 shots there were cracks in the machine, and the system was returned to plant number 92,

After the failure of the F-23-I system, work continued on the lightweight 76-mm battalion howitzer F 23-II.

The battalion howitzer of the simplified design F-23-II with a single-sided gun was manufactured by plant No. 92 from September to November 1936 of the year according to drawings of the design bureau of plant No. 92 according to the order of the GUVP of 21 of August 1935.

Launch single-riveted riveted. Recoil devices are located in the cradle under the barrel. Brake recoil hydraulic type Schneider. Knuckle hydropneumatic. When you roll back recoil devices are fixed. Spring balancing mechanism, located on the right. The rod is connected with the cradle, and the heel of the case rests on the ground.

The lifting mechanism had two sectors. Shooting was conducted from a round riveted pan, resting against the ground. The pallet is equipped with a large drive coulter. Horizontal guidance was carried out by moving the wheel axle (performing the role of the trunk) and a bar. The axis of rotation served as the center of the pallet. Wheels when shooting were behind. When moving to the marching position, the trunk was thrown to 180 °.

Factory tests of howitzer F-23-II were carried out at the NIAP from 10 to 23 in November 1936 of the year. Field testing of the system was launched in January 1937. On the 34-m shot, the recoil devices and the lifting mechanism failed.

Wheels metal rubberized. Suspension is not. The system was disassembled and could be transported on horse and human bills.

Shooting results from F-23-1 23 January 1937:

- Projectile: 4,7kg with KT-1

- Charge: 0,044 (VL) + 0,133 (4 / 1) = 0,182 kg

- Initial speed: 310 — 331 m / s

- Firing range (with vertical guidance hovering 45 g) - 6200 m.

Both systems F-23-I and F-23-II were tested until the middle of 1938, but they were not put into service and work on them was terminated by order of 11 in November 1939.

As a result, by June 22 1941, our rifle regiment had 6 - 76-mm regimental guns arr, 1927 g. And 12 - 45-mm anti-tank guns. This is theoretically, and practically in a significant part of the rifle regiments, and even then. 45-mm PTP arr. 1932 and arr. 1937., In general, were at the level of the PTP of that time and could hit almost all types of German tanks in 1941 at short distances. However, the 76-mm regimental gun obr. 1927 was simply not suitable for regimental and battalion artillery.

 

X-NUMX-mm howitzer F-76 data
Trunk data
Caliber, mm76,2
Barrel length, mm / klb.956/12,5
Volume of a chamber, dm3+0,32
Steepness cut, club18
Number of rifling24
Cutting depth, mm0,76
Cutting width, mm6,94
Barrel weight with bolt, kg (F-23-I / F-23-II)83/90
  
Data carriages
Vertical guidance angle, degrees: 
F-23-I (76-mm / 45-mm)0 hail; + 65 / 0 hail; + 25 hail
F-23-II (76-mm / D5-mm)0 degrees; + 65 degrees / -
Angle of horizontal naming, hail (Ф-23-I / Ф-23-II)-30 degrees / -10 degrees
Rollback length, mm: when 0 degrees - 2 degrees530 + 40
with 20 hail - 65 hail350 + 40
The height of the line of fire, mm350/238
Bed length, mm (F-23-I / F-23-II)1800/2300
Code width, mm (F-23-I / F-23-II)950/965
Clearance, mm (F-23-I / F-23-II)215/260
Wheel diameter, mm (F-23-I / F-23-II)615/650
Distance from the pallet axis to the combat axis, mm1800
Recoil weight parts, kg (F-23-I / F-23-II)90/100
Quality weight parts, kg (F-23-I / F-23-II)140/158
Weight in firing position, kg (F-23-I / F-23-II)380/350
  
Performance data
Carriage speed, km / h (F-23-I / F-23-II)35- 45/10
Ballistic 76-mm barrel 
Projectile weight, kg (poTTE / fact)4,7/4,7
Early speed, m / s (PTZ / fact)320/305


So what happened? Why are our battalions and regiments without effective artillery systems? Why were three artillery programs fail?

It is almost impossible to give an exhaustive answer to this question in one article. But a significant impact on this outcome had a visible competition of light mortars and howitzers with mortars. Moreover, the arguments of the supporters of mortars were not groundless, since, unlike Germany and Japan, many other countries, such as France, Great Britain, Poland and Finland, finally decided not to waste efforts on battalion howitzers and mortars, replacing them everywhere with mortars like Stokes- Brandt

Of course, 35-K and F-23 could not replace the mortar, but only complement it. However, it should be remembered that in 1934 - 1938. the fate of the mortars literally hung in the balance, and the “mortar lobby” of breast control rose against any mortars, small howitzers, grenade launchers, etc. The tragic fate of the 40,8-mm Taubin automatic grenade launcher is one example of this opposition.

And before the start of World War II, the battalion cannons of mounted fire did not find their way into the Red Army’s weapons system.
Author:
38 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. svp67
    svp67 April 20 2013 08: 17 New
    +7
    An alternative to mortar?

    Of course not, the mortar wins, for a huge advantage ... Thanks to the author for interesting material
    1. Civil
      Civil April 20 2013 10: 08 New
      +1
      interesting article ... the war put everything in its place in the end
    2. avdkrd
      avdkrd April 20 2013 12: 34 New
      0
      especially if it's cornflower. Cornflower is the best implementation of this concept.
  2. aszzz888
    aszzz888 April 20 2013 08: 36 New
    +2
    It is intelligible, available with layout and comparison tables. For work and article +.
  3. Takashi
    Takashi April 20 2013 08: 47 New
    +1
    very interesting. first read about it
  4. Mitek
    Mitek April 20 2013 09: 15 New
    +1
    Quote: svp67
    An alternative to mortar?

    Of course not, the mortar wins, for a huge advantage ... Thanks to the author for interesting material

    Mortar is hundreds of times cheaper and easier to mass produce. And there is no alternative to him and cannot be.
    1. svp67
      svp67 April 20 2013 09: 48 New
      +1
      Quote: Mitek
      Mortar is hundreds of times cheaper and easier to mass produce. And there is no alternative to him and cannot be.

      In addition to the mortar itself, this can be attributed to the ammunition used by it ...
    2. AK-47
      AK-47 April 20 2013 09: 55 New
      +3
      Quote: Mitek
      Mortar is hundreds of times cheaper and easier to mass produce. And there is no alternative to him and cannot be.

      The mortar is useless against tanks, and the forty-five against the infantry, so "two in one" during the Second World War would be very useful.
      1. family tree
        family tree April 20 2013 11: 46 New
        +2
        The mortar, in comparison with the howitzer, has two drawbacks (about the advantages already mentioned above)
        1. A large dispersion area, with mounted shooting, accuracy suffers accordingly.
        2. the impossibility of persistent shooting. Bunkers, bunkers, city blocks.
        1. svp67
          svp67 April 20 2013 13: 47 New
          +1
          Quote: perepilka
          A large dispersion area, with mounted shooting, accuracy suffers accordingly.
          2. the impossibility of persistent shooting. Bunkers, bunkers, city blocks.

          1. The disadvantage can be compensated by the rate of fire
          2.But it is great to come in handy to "smoke" the infantry cover of the bunker out of the trenches, and you can try and "hammer" the bunker, but in the city there is no better means to throw a "present" through the house, they would now be in the UAV company. ..
      2. svp67
        svp67 April 20 2013 13: 42 New
        +1
        Quote: AK-47
        Mortar is useless against tanks

        Not when you don’t say it, a mine that hit the top view of the tank doesn’t add health to the latter and its crew. Although of course the mortar is not a first-line TCP, but there have also been cases when a mortar mine destroyed a plane flying at low altitude
        1. Bigriver
          Bigriver April 20 2013 16: 43 New
          0
          Quote: svp67

          Not when you don’t say it, a mine that hit the top view of the tank doesn’t add health to the latter and its crew.

          Again, which one?
          From "battalion" 82 mm with 400 grams of TNT, the average tank of the Germans will not be.
          1. svp67
            svp67 April 20 2013 16: 48 New
            0
            Quote: BigRiver
            Again, which one?
            From "battalion" 82 mm with 400 grams of TNT, the average tank of the Germans will not be.

            Just like ... If in the MTO area, so write-and-miss - radiators can catch the rest with fragments, and the blast wave itself can do a lot of bad things in that place.
            And when it hit the roof of the tower, it drowned, be healthy ...
            Yes, and a piece of iron flying from a kilometer height of 3,5 kg by itself can do good harm ...
            1. Bigriver
              Bigriver April 20 2013 17: 11 New
              +2
              Quote: svp67

              Just like ... If in the MTO area, then generally write-and-miss ...

              During the war, ours studied the effectiveness of the use of RS-82 and RS-132 in armored vehicles.
              The first is effective only against tanks up to "two", Pz-38 (t) and armored personnel carriers.
              But for RSa, the weight and speed are much greater than that of a mine.
              In general, to consider seriously firing a mortar at a maneuvering technique is like ... wassat
              From despair if only.
              1. svp67
                svp67 April 20 2013 17: 17 New
                +1
                Quote: BigRiver
                During the war, ours studied the effectiveness of the use of RS-82 and RS-132 in armored vehicles.
                The first is effective only against tanks up to "two" and armored personnel carriers.

                You compare the angles of "throwing" and of falling, they differ ... As a result, the "Katyusha" projectile hit the target at a shallower angle.
                1. Bigriver
                  Bigriver April 20 2013 17: 51 New
                  0
                  Quote: svp67

                  You compare the angles of "throwing" and of falling, they differ ... As a result, the "Katyusha" projectile hit the target at a shallower angle.

                  We are talking about underwing aviation RS.
                  There are many reports of the GBTU of the Republic of Armenia on the main factors affecting our tanks in the Second World War. For different years, very carefully, with a listing of calibers, weapons, the lesion. Both anti-tank missiles and anti-tank mines, aviation, faunas, etc. are indicated. Mortar mines as a damage factor are not indicated at all. Even the impact of aviation takes a few percent. There are some cases of unknown causes of failure.
                  On the other hand, even with the Germans I didn’t notice the presence of horizontal bed nets from anti-tank minipads on tanks winked
                  Here "Iveka" testing, lay a land mine of 6 kg. And you say 400 grams on top of the armor wink
              2. svp67
                svp67 April 20 2013 17: 21 New
                0
                Quote: BigRiver
                From despair if only.

                And out of necessity
                Several tanks managed to get to the distance 250-300 meters from our mortars. And then the commander of one of the calculations, sergeant-Ossetian Vladimir Berdiev, turned the mortar barrel back almost to the limit and, supporting it with his hands, ordered the mine to be lowered into the barrel with a minimum charge.
                Berdiev tried this method of shooting the previous winter during the battles at the Barvenkovo ​​bridgehead, but then the aim was German submachine gunners. Now he applied this method against tanks.
                Mina took off on a steep path and crashed onto the roof of the engine compartment of one of the tanks. The tank caught fire. The crew left the car and rushed to the run
                http://www.opoccuu.com/minomyoty-protiv-tankov.htm
                1. Bigriver
                  Bigriver April 20 2013 17: 56 New
                  0
                  Quote: svp67

                  And out of necessity ...

                  Let's make it easier.
                  Charter, instructions, battalion mortars defined as PT-means?
                  Mortar crews, during training, trained to repel a tank attack?
                  Special PT mines produced?

                  And here, by the way, aviation specialized ammunition, still produced - ROFS-132.
                  1. svp67
                    svp67 April 20 2013 19: 46 New
                    +1
                    Quote: BigRiver
                    And here, by the way, aviation specialized ammunition, still produced - ROFS-132.


                    Are you sure about this?
                    ROFS is a rocket-propelled high explosive projectile, it has a direct mission, somewhat different than fighting armored targets, such as a tank. And the fact that they did it is good.
                    But to combat the tanks, the RBS-132 was developed, the Armor-piercing version, adopted by the 1942. Armor penetration up to 75 mm normal. Consisted of the Il-Xnumx.

                    The defeat of tanks with missile shells with a fragmentation warhead (RS-82 and PC-132) was possible only with a direct hit. Missiles with an armor-piercing and high-explosive fragmentation warhead RBS-82, RBS-132 and ROFS-132 had significantly better dispersion when firing and significantly exceeded the PCs in armor penetration. For example, with a direct hit of ROFS-132 on board the StuG IV 30-mm armor made its way through, and the gun, equipment and crew; inside the self-propelled guns were disabled. In fact, getting into the ROFS-132 tank led to its loss. RBS-82 armor penetration reached 50 mm, and RBS-132 - 75 mm. Therefore, a direct hit in any Wehrmacht tank ensured its defeat.

                    In general, the use of ROFS from the same "opera", when, in the absence of real armor-piercing shells, they used shrapnel set to "strike".

                    So, one thing is what is prescribed in the charters, and the other as sometimes had to fight ...
                    1. Bigriver
                      Bigriver April 21 2013 07: 22 New
                      0
                      Quote: svp67
                      ... In general, the use of ROFS from the same "opera", when, in the absence of real armor-piercing shells, they used shrapnel set to "strike".
                      So, one thing is what is prescribed in the charters, and the other as sometimes had to fight ...

                      In the manual on RS there is an orientation against tanks. But in the manual on the battalion mortar 82 mm - no. Do you think this is the inertia of the command of the Red Army? winked

                      There are all sorts of cases. I'm talking about a mine in 3 kg at MTO.
                      But, from individual successful cases, to draw conclusions about wide and effective use is, as it were .., hmm stop
                      For example, the armor-piercer Vasin (a real case), using 28 rounds, was able to shoot down the Yu-87 from the ATRA.
                      What follows from this? What can PTRD and PTRS effectively operate in an air defense division? And can this be taken into account as a stability factor?
                      1. svp67
                        svp67 April 21 2013 07: 37 New
                        0
                        Quote: BigRiver
                        In the manual on RS there is an orientation against tanks.

                        "Orientation" is from a slightly different "opera", and so this is a "recommendation"
                        Quote: BigRiver
                        There are all sorts of cases. I'm talking about a mine in 3 kg at MTO.
                        But, from individual successful cases, to draw conclusions about wide and effective use is, as it were .., hmm

                        About effective use - in the sense of 100% destruction, then of course. But here we can argue about widespread use. Since when there is nothing else at hand, then one has to fight with such a "non-core" weapon. And besides, in a battle, victory does not always mean the destruction of the enemy, it is enough to simply force him to abandon the implementation of his plans.
                        And you know that even the realization that this type of weapon is safe for you on 9 \ 10 still makes you constantly remember that on 1 \ 10 it can kill you and act carefully ...
                      2. Bigriver
                        Bigriver April 21 2013 10: 02 New
                        0
                        Quote: svp67

                        About effective use - in the sense of 100% destruction, then of course. But about widespread use, here you can argue ...

                        Nothing takes you. laughing
                        Even ROFS-132, comparable in weight to the M-30 howitzer “suitcase”.
                        We're talking about a mortar alternative. angry
                        And here we need definite answers. Can a mortar fulfill the duties of a pt-means or cannot? Build defense on it or not?

                        I suggest not to argue, but to lose the real situation.
                        The battalion takes up defense on a tank-accessible terrain. There is a high probability of the appearance of motorized infantry and tanks.
                        From the standard artillery assets at the battalion commander to a 1 km strip: a 45 mm anti-tank submarine platoon and a 82-mm mortar company.
                        In 1941, per kilometer of breakthrough, the Germans launched about one tank battalion (60-70 tanks). Let's say in the first line - 20 pieces of Pz-III.
                        What do you think, in this situation, the battalion commander will take into account the “mighty” company of mortars and somehow rely on it, building a PT defense? And the regiment and the divisional commander, will consider such a PT defense in this area normal due to the presence of mortars?
                      3. svp67
                        svp67 April 21 2013 10: 12 New
                        0
                        Quote: BigRiver
                        What do you think, in this situation, the battalion commander will take into account the “mighty” company of mortars and somehow rely on it, building a PT defense?

                        Officially, of course not, in the plans and tasks, this will not happen.
                        It will be bad for that battalion in the breakthrough strip - there are no chances.
                        Nevertheless, the areas of SO and REO for this company will be assigned. And at the time of the attack, everything that will survive, after a dense enemy fire, will begin to act according to the plan that was outlined earlier.
                        Mortars with their fire will primarily cut off and bring down the infantry, trying to destroy the interaction, but if at that moment the tanks get it, I think the battalion commander will not be offended.
                      4. Bigriver
                        Bigriver April 21 2013 10: 42 New
                        0
                        Quote: svp67

                        Officially, of course not., in plans and tasks, this will not happen.
                        Mortars with their fire will primarily cut off and bring down the infantry, trying to destroy the interaction, but if at that moment, something goes to the tanks, I think the battalion commander will not be offended.

                        If "no" and "if you get it," which of the 82mm PT-means?
                        If neither the battalion commander, nor the regiment, nor the divisional commander holds it for such? wink
                        If, in the instructions for the 82 mm, throughout the war, tanks were not indicated at all as probable targets, and the combat methods of fighting armored vehicles were not practiced.
                        It is not even a palliative, such as an ampoule.
                      5. svp67
                        svp67 April 21 2013 11: 11 New
                        0
                        Quote: BigRiver
                        If "no" and "if you get it," which of the 82-mm PT-means? Let's make it easier.

                        Let's make it even easier. I never said anywhere that the mortar was the main means of fighting tanks. But in some situations, he is able, if not to destroy a tank, then to inflict significant "injuries" on him or his crew, which is what the soldiers did ... I gave you an example of the destruction of a tank. During the "Karabakh" conflict, the tank was destroyed by a grenade hit from a grenade launcher. It shouldn't have happened, but it did. There is a video of how in Syria a militant destroys a tank with an ordinary fragmentation grenade, also an unlikely fact - but happening ...
                        The one who fights wins ...
              3. Prohor
                Prohor April 25 2013 18: 55 New
                0
                Can you tell me more about Vasin? To shoot 28 times from a single-shot ATGM - how long will it take?
          2. svp67
            svp67 April 20 2013 19: 59 New
            0
            Quote: BigRiver
            Special PT mines produced?

            No, this has already happened in the post-war period, on the basis of understanding the experience and the emergence of the ability to control a mine in flight
            Today, mortar weapons are considered one of the important types of field artillery and is a means of fire support for infantry units. In the process of development, mortars received an additional ability to combat armored combat vehicles by creating guided mines. In this case, effective defeat of the armor plates is achieved due to the steep hinged trajectory of the ammunition and falling into the weakly protected roof of the tank
            Read more: http://vpk-news.ru/articles/1038

            The 81-mm mine "Merlin" with control at the end of the trajectory was developed by British Aerospace (Great Britain) since 1981 at its own expense. Mine is fired from standard 81-mm mortars at a distance of up to 4 km
  • Bigriver
    Bigriver April 20 2013 11: 46 New
    +1
    Not quite correct title.
    An alternative to which mortar? If the battalion - then no. If the regimental - then yes.
    And since we are talking about an infantry battalion gun, we had no alternative to it. Unfortunately.
    Very convenient and lightweight crap for picking out covered firing points, machine gun nests in the attack, and suppressing the fire of infantry located in field fortifications.
    Mine 82 mm, as well as a flat trajectory 45-ki for these purposes are of little use.
  • Kars
    Kars April 20 2013 13: 56 New
    0
    Something reminds
    1. svp67
      svp67 April 20 2013 14: 24 New
      0
      Quote: Kars
      Something reminds

      Nothing new under the moon ...
    2. bask
      bask April 20 2013 16: 32 New
      0

      Prototype ATLAS TB155 low recoil towed howitzer American 33-mm-1.
      1. svp67
        svp67 April 20 2013 16: 41 New
        0
        Quote: bask
        Prototype ATLAS TB155 low recoil towed howitzer American 33-mm-1.


        Somehow he’s ugly, I can’t believe that he will serve well ...
  • svp67
    svp67 April 20 2013 15: 42 New
    +2
    Or maybe this unit mortar 2Б9М "Cornflower" is the best embodiment of battalion artillery
    1. bask
      bask April 20 2013 16: 39 New
      +1
      Quote: svp67
      from this unit mortar 2B9M "Cornflower" the best embodiment of battalion artillery

      Surely the BEST!
      Afghan.

      Chechnya.
  • svp67
    svp67 April 20 2013 16: 16 New
    +2
    This is, of course, "Best of the best" in the battalion level, it's a pity it's just too big ...
    1. bask
      bask April 20 2013 16: 48 New
      0
      And as with the bourgeoisie, now. The US Marine Corps has issued contracts for the development of 120 mm mortar ammunition of increased accuracy and range. The PERM ammunition is designed for the M120 EFSS 327 mm towed rifled mortar. It must have an accuracy of at least 20 meters, with a range of up to 17 km. Contracts for the development and manufacture of prototypes for a period of 24 months were issued to Raytheon companies in conjunction with Israel Military Industries (IAI), ATK in collaboration with General Dynamics, the leading EFSS contractor.
  • ed65b
    ed65b April 20 2013 16: 51 New
    0
    I read how our people in Chechnya hunted for "Vasilko". He did a lot of trouble. It seems that the Czechs adapted it to a truck and shot our positions with a nomadic method. if I find this story I'll post it.
  • family tree
    family tree April 20 2013 17: 07 New
    +2
    Here's a "regiment". Not a howitzer, but an addition to a mortar, just right. It is called OB-25. Cumulative and high-explosive fragmentation projectiles. Caliber 76,2mm, weight 600kg. Unfortunately, I went to the troops, only in the second half of 1943. That's right, carriage from forty-five yes
    You can read here: http: //cris9.narod.ru/rva_ob25.htm
  • pinecone
    pinecone April 21 2013 17: 24 New
    +1
    The German 75mm light infantry gun proved to be a very effective weapon and received the nickname "evil cannon" from Soviet soldiers.