Rostec has developed a 30-mm projectile with a controlled detonation.

Loading a belt of 30 x 165 mm ammunition into a BMD-2. Photo by the Russian Ministry of Defense.

The Russian ammunition industry is taking into account the demands of the times and is working on new designs. Recently, it was announced that a new projectile for small-caliber ammunition is being developed. artillery, capable of detonating at a given point in the trajectory. Such a munition should be used, first and foremost, against unmanned aerial vehicles. aviationIt will be able to be used by one of the main weapons of domestic development, installed on various platforms.

On the eve of the exhibition

The press service of the Rostec state corporation announced the development of a new munition on February 5. It revealed the existence of this development and some of its features. The corporation's plans for the near future were also outlined. However, the design of the new munition, technical details of the project, and other interesting information have not yet been disclosed.

According to official data, the new projectile has a caliber of 30 mm and is intended for use with the 2A42 automatic cannon. This type of weapon is widely used in Russian and foreign armies, mounting it on ground combat vehicles, helicopters, and other platforms.

The key feature of the new projectile is its controlled detonation, thanks to a programmable fuse. The targeting system of a combat vehicle or other carrier must input the necessary data into the fuse's memory before firing. After firing, the munition detonates automatically at the designated point along its trajectory.

A 2A42 cannon as part of the Berezhok combat module's armament. Photo: Wikimedia Commons

This projectile is proposed for use primarily in air defense missions. It should be effective against small UAVs, loitering munitions, and similar aerial targets.

The development stage of the new projectile has not yet been announced. However, Rostec is already ready to showcase this product to potential customers. For example, the World Defense Show 2026 international military-technical exhibition opens in the Saudi Arabian capital on February 8. A projectile with a programmable fuse will be part of the Russian exhibit.

The exhibition will feature mockups of the projectile and fuse. Key information of interest will also be disclosed. Based on this information, potential customers will be able to draw conclusions and decide whether they need such ammunition.

Technical features

Much of the information about the new missile remains unknown. For example, the developer, the current stage of development, the possible launch date for production, etc. have not been disclosed. However, Rostec has disclosed some interesting technical information.

Gun alignment. Photo courtesy of the Russian Ministry of Defense.

The new ammunition is reportedly designed for the 2A42 automatic cannon. It has a caliber of 30 mm and is likely very similar to existing rounds. This round is intended to be used to produce a single-shot round measuring 30 x 165 mm, compatible with the 2A42 cannon and some other systems.

The new projectile is called a shrapnel round. This indicates that it uses a limited-mass explosive charge and a casing that fragments upon detonation. The specifics of this fragmentation, the shape of the fragmentation field, etc., have not yet been disclosed.

The projectile is detonated by a uniquely designed fuse. Apparently, this is a conical device screwed into the projectile's nose, like other fuses. The new device has an optical data receiver. It also includes sensors and a computer that track the projectile's movement and calculate the moment of detonation.

Using this projectile requires not only the 2A42 cannon but also a modified fire control system. It receives the necessary calculation algorithms and a programmer for setting the fuses. Data is transmitted from the programmer to the projectile via an optical device. It is likely mounted on the ammunition feed system or the round feed line.

Apparently, the programmable projectile's ballistic characteristics are no different from other 30mm ammunition. The maximum firing range, trajectory parameters, etc. should be virtually identical. However, the presence of a new fuse radically changes the projectile's combat capabilities.

The Ka-52 attack helicopter is one of the carriers of the 2A42 cannon. Photo: Wikimedia Commons

Promising direction

Small-caliber artillery shells with programmable or controlled detonation are of great interest to the military. They can significantly improve the effectiveness of fire against ground and air targets. For example, they can destroy ground targets behind cover or air targets without a direct hit.

The Russian defense industry has long been developing such ammunition. Information about such projects was publicly available as early as the first half of the last decade. Subsequently, there have been repeated reports of the development of projectiles of various calibers for various weapons.

It is known that in 2016, a 57mm caliber unitary round with a programmable fuse was submitted for testing. Even then, UAVs were mentioned as a typical target for such a munition. Over the next few years, Russian industry developed similar rounds in 30mm and 23mm calibers.

It's noteworthy that these projects developed fuses with different operating principles. For example, the latest project from Rostec involves equipping the projectile with its own flight parameter tracking devices. Meanwhile, some older projects proposed remotely controlling the detonation from a combat vehicle.

Both types of controlled fuses have their advantages and disadvantages. A remote-controlled device is significantly simpler and less expensive, while a standalone device is immune to interference. Both options are more complex than a standard contact fuse, although they outperform it in all combat capabilities.

The Mi-28NM is another aerial platform for a 30mm cannon. Photo: Russian Helicopters

Wide choice

Thus, in recent years, Russian industry has developed a number of small-caliber artillery shells with controlled detonation. Unfortunately, for a variety of reasons, these products have not yet entered service. However, there is every reason to expect this to happen in the foreseeable future.

The development of new ammunition has several important consequences and outcomes. First and foremost is the development of new artillery rounds, shells, and fuses for them, which offer significant advantages over existing products. Once an order is placed, production and deliveries can begin.

Furthermore, through such projects, several Russian industrial enterprises have accumulated valuable experience and identified and refined key technologies. These developments can now be used in new projects. It's likely that the announced munition from Rostec originated in this manner.

The precise prospects for the Rostec projectile and other similar developments are still unknown. However, the overall situation is encouraging. In recent years, the need for further development has arisen. Defense With a focus on engaging small air targets, this increased the value of small-caliber artillery and the need for controlled-detonation ammunition.

Against the backdrop of these developments and trends, Rostec will present its new ammunition at an international exhibition. This product will clearly be of interest to various foreign countries that operate 2A42 cannons or similar models. Consequently, production and delivery orders can be expected soon.

Comments

[Vladimir_2U]

The Russian ammunition industry is taking into account the demands of the times and is working on new models.

What a great joke! It's absolutely brilliant! The only thing funnier would be "ahead of its time."

Unfortunately, such products, for a number of reasons, have not yet entered service.

Are a number of reasons related to the Criminal Code, or is it just an abstraction? And are the reasons China has long had such missiles the opposite of domestic ones?
It is clear that the questions are not addressed to the author of the article...

[ZloyCat]

"And the reasons why China has had such shells for a long time, are they the opposite of domestic reasons?"
The Americans had similar shells in the 40s

[Vladimir_2U]

Quote: ZloyKot

The Americans had similar shells in the 40s

No. A shell, especially a large one, 90mm or larger, with a proximity radar fuse is not the same as a small-caliber shell with a programmable fuse. The USSR had such fuses by the 50s.

[air wolf]

The most interesting thing is how the detonation settings will be entered, the rest is all clear.

[Cympak]

Quote: air wolf

The most interesting thing is how the detonation settings will be entered, the rest is all clear.

According to some publications, a laser programmer is used, which, after the projectile leaves the barrel, sets the detonation time to a sensor installed in the base of the projectile.
The question is how to practically use a programmable projectile on the 2A42, which has a dual-belt feed. It would be necessary to load a mixed belt, for example, with a HE shell and a programmable shrapnel projectile.
It is strange that the nomenclature of guns for which the programmable projectile is intended does not mention the 2A38, which is installed on the Pantsir and Tunguska

[Bad_gr]

Quote: Cympak

According to some publications, a laser programmer is used, which, after the projectile leaves the barrel, sets the detonation time to a sensor installed in the base of the projectile.

I came across a description of a modern programmable projectile, and there the speed of this projectile is also measured as it leaves the gun barrel, and in the article about ours it is written

Sighting system of a combat vehicle or other carrier before the shot must enter the necessary data into the fuse memory

that is, the projectile is detonated based not on the actual, but on the theoretically calculated speed of the projectile, which means the detonation location will be +/- several meters, which is significant when firing at UAVs.

[Bad_gr]

The type of ammunition in question

[garri-lin]

Not a few meters, but much more.
The German 35 mm with all the speed meters actually shows ten meters.

[Zaurbek]

Думаю,что они (патроны) не переживут такой скорострельности ....

[ZloyCat]

"The most interesting thing is how the regulations will be introduced."
like this

[jonht]

If you look at the materials and publications on this topic here on VO, you'll see that they've been "inventing something on this topic" for at least 8-10 years, if not longer. But things haven't moved on...

[Kalmar]

I also remembered that just a few years ago, someone was trying to convince me that we'd already developed programmable 30mm rounds and were literally one step away from mass production. It was like, "Let's finish our tea and then go start churning them out." Everyone's also threatening to unveil a similar 57mm round to the public—I wonder how things are going with that.

[cpls22]

Data is transmitted from the programmer to the projectile via an optical device. It is likely mounted on the ammunition feed system or the shot feed line.

Or maybe in the muzzle device, simply "informing" the projectile at what speed it leaves the barrel, passing a pair of light marks. There can be several of these pairs, corresponding to discrete detonation distances. This solution also fits into

Rostec's latest project involves equipping the projectile with its own flight parameter tracking equipment.

, because it takes into account differences in the weight and temperature of the powder.

[Hitriy Zhuk]

Quote from cpls22

at what speed does it fly out of the barrel

Well, the attachment is standard, the weight is too, but religion doesn't allow you to calculate the speed from the factory?

[cpls22]

Velocity depends on both temperature and propellant quality. For a simple projectile, these differences are insignificant, but for one detonated along the trajectory, using timer timing, they can be significant for accuracy. For a conventional projectile, the difference becomes apparent at the terminal portions of the trajectory, which are less important in anti-aircraft fire.
In addition, light rappers can simultaneously program the projectile by choosing the pairs of these rappers.

[Hitriy Zhuk]

Well, thermometers were invented, but gunpowder is up to the manufacturer. If there are standards, let them at least comply with them in one batch, so that these parameters can be entered into the calculator.

I don't see a problem here, I see the authorities' reluctance. Like, there's not a single military deputy pushing for this.

(and considering that those guns are rapid-fire, it's probably easier to set the ranges to +/- 50m, well, that's just an option)

[cpls22]

Quote: Hitriy Zhuk

Well, thermometers were invented, but gunpowder is up to the manufacturer. If there are standards, let them at least comply with them in one batch.

You can't put a thermometer in every shell, and the standards were introduced long ago, when such requirements weren't intended. I think raising the standards will require significant revisions to the production process, and even that would be a half-measure, since the properties will still change during the shelf life. It's easier to make an on-the-spot correction based on the actual velocity of the shell. Actually, it's not about measuring the velocity per se, I think. Roughly speaking, the shell is initially programmed for a range of a thousand parrots, and the muzzle device tells it the size of those parrots.

[dragon772]

Military Acceptance (TC Zvezda), at one of the exhibitions (last year, or even the year before), they already showed a 30mm projectile with a remote detonator. One of the Russian factories proposed to begin serial production.

[Explainer]

After that, I didn't read any further: "The new projectile is called shrapnel. This indicates the use of a limited-mass explosive charge and a casing that shatters into fragments upon detonation."
So, a shrapnel shell has ready-made striking elements - that's why pearl barley was called shrapnel.
In general, the level of Rostec's printed materials is below par.

[solar]

It is difficult to understand from the article,is being new projectile or already developedenSomehow the author uses it every other time in the text. But the difference is big.

[lynnot]

From the available data, it is known that we have been testing, reworking, and testing similar shells for about 10 years now... Just recently there was a similar article and even this one - https://topwar.ru/158054-zakazana-partija-30-mm-boepripasov-s-upravljaemym-podryvom.html

[solar]

This article also doesn't make it clear that they've finished and moved on to production. Or is it like renovating an apartment?

Repairs cannot be completed, they can only be suspended.

[lynnot]

This article also doesn't make it clear that they've finished and moved on to production. Or is it like renovating an apartment?

That's exactly what I meant. The trials began in 2016, that article is from 2019, and after that, it's all a blur...

[garri-lin]

Words are words. But the cart is still there.
They developed this well. They boast about it every two years.
Two questions:
Is there a possibility of mass production?
The price of a shot.
If you think about it this way, the Armed Forces need two ammunition of this type.
Anti-aircraft. With light GPO projectiles dispersing in a cone at an angle of 15-25 degrees along the projectile's longitudinal axis.
Anti-personnel. With the dispersion of heavy projectiles perpendicular to the longitudinal axis of the projectile.
Since the 57mm issue is already overlooked, at least 30mm is needed, although it's unprofitable from an economic standpoint. The fuse will cost the same for both, but the 57mm's effectiveness is many times greater, both in terms of the number of GPEs and the firing range.

[VlK]

Anti-personnel. With the dispersion of heavy GPE perpendicular to the longitudinal axis of the projectile.
Since the 57mm issue is already overlooked, at least 30mm is needed, although it's unprofitable from an economic standpoint. The fuse will cost the same for both, but the 57mm's effectiveness is many times greater, both in terms of the number of GPEs and the firing range.

Is there any point in making a fuss? After WWII, even the three-inch caliber was deemed weak against field fortifications; suppressing a fortified firing point is more reliable with conventional ammunition, while the fragmentation effect of the 30mm is obviously negligible, and infantry doesn't advance in lines these days. So why bother with it, especially at a higher price?
The 57mm probably faces the same criticism, plus the ratio of gun weight, rate of fire, and the amount of ammunition carried. It's no wonder that even in air defense, historically, this caliber was quickly abandoned in favor of more powerful ones - it's neither one thing nor the other, neither a small anti-aircraft gun nor a powerful anti-aircraft gun.

[garri-lin]

Well, since there is no stamp, we write on the packaging.
57mm is very effective against infantry on the ground.
Plus, the experience of Western innovators. There, 35-45mm programmable infantry rifles show quite adequate results.

[Sergey Aleksandrovich]

Not to get into the details, but all the shortcomings that made the three-inch shell and 82mm mortar shell ineffective have now been overcome. Explosions previously invisible to binoculars are now monitored by drones. The low penetration of cover has been overcome by the development of shaped-charge fragmentation munitions. And the relatively small explosive charge is offset by the ability to install proximity fuses that detonate 5 meters above the ground. An 81mm cluster mortar has even been developed abroad. This is confirmed by the enemy's 60mm mortars, which detonate their mortars in the air using proximity fuses.

[VlK]

but surely 30 mm is still incomparable in terms of fragmentation effect?

[solar]

So why do we need it then, and at a higher price?

For close-range air defense, especially against drones.

[VlK]

the discussion was about the anti-personnel option

If you think about it this way, the Armed Forces need two ammunition of this type.
Anti-aircraft. With light GPO projectiles dispersing in a cone at an angle of 15-25 degrees along the projectile's longitudinal axis.
Anti-personnel. With the dispersion of heavy projectiles perpendicular to the longitudinal axis of the projectile.

Meanwhile, there is also a question about the anti-aircraft gun - how will the gunner on a standard vehicle, from under the armor, catch these small, nimble drones in his sights? This is not a slow, crop duster at a decent altitude, which is immediately visible.

[solar]

As for infantry, it's doubtful. They haven't attacked in groups dense enough to use projectiles for a long time. And while excessively heavy projectiles will increase the range, there will be few of them, and the probability of hitting the target will drop sharply.
In anti-aircraft guns it is used to compensate for aiming errors.

Anti-personnel. With the dispersion of heavy projectiles perpendicular to the longitudinal axis of the projectile.

And if you make a mistake in the range, then everything will go to waste.

[VlK]

This is not my idea, I actually doubt it - see above in the thread:

Is there any point in making a fuss? After WWII, even the three-inch caliber was deemed weak against field fortifications; suppressing a fortified firing point is more reliable with conventional ammunition, while the fragmentation effect of the 30mm is obviously negligible, and infantry doesn't advance in lines these days. So why bother with it, especially at a higher price?

[Foggy Dew]

Well, that's nothing new. The projectile—fine, but what about the guns and programmers? And what are we going to fire it with? We have modules on ground vehicles with barrels that dangle like whips when fired—programmers won't help them if the projectile flies anywhere.

[Bersaglieri]

Hmm, have they finally finished it? The first ads were around 20 years ago.

[LuZappa]

Quote: ZloyKot

The Americans had similar shells in the 40s

Come on, I don't believe it. On what principles? Are you confusing them with radio-controlled fuses?

[Bersaglieri]

You got the caliber mixed up. The radio fuse was in a 5-inch, universal one :)

[senima56]

"Unfortunately, such products, for a number of reasons, have not yet entered service." Very interesting! These shells were needed BEFORE the start of the Second World War, but they, you see, "have not yet entered service for a number of reasons." Or maybe someone in the Ministry of Defense is simply "putting a spoke in our wheel, throwing stones at our scythes"?! Sabotage, sabotage and treason!

[ifdru74]

Most likely, the component base is weak. There needs to be room for the explosives after the fuse. The fact that work is progressing is good, but the fact that there's still no mass-produced projectile with a remote detonator is bad.

[senima56]

We demonstrated such equipment at an exhibition just a few years ago! But it seems like everything new and advanced is made in one-off units specifically for exhibitions and parades! And if you look at the LBS, it’s all either Soviet designs or “military homemade guns”! Or maybe our Ministry of Defense is too sluggish?! Either there are "saboteurs and enemies of the people" at the "top"!

[wladimirjankov]

[quoteIt seems that everything new and advanced here is made in single copies specifically for Exhibitions and Parades!][/quote]
That seems to be the case. They make a few crude prototypes, often using imported components, and boast about it. But when it comes to mass production, it turns out there's not much to build and assemble them from. There's nothing domestically produced, and there are sanctions on imports. It's like with civil aviation. Several flight models of the MS-21 aircraft were manufactured 10 years ago and were supposed to go into production then, but sanctions were imposed on the Western materials, systems, and components from which it was made. Import substitution is proving extremely difficult. The aircraft still hasn't entered mass production. The same situation applies to the Superjet, the A-100 AWACS, reconnaissance and communications satellites, and other modern technology and weapons. It's possible the same story happened with remote-detonated projectiles.

[Bersaglieri]

It's not an impression, it's exactly like that :)

[bk0010]

Couldn't we make a programmable fuse instead of a projectile? So that it could be adapted for other projectiles as well?

[garri-lin]

This doesn't make sense.
In small caliber, the main factors are the GPE and their dispersion.
A regular projectile won't be of much use.

[garri-lin]

This doesn't make sense.
In small caliber, the main factors are the GPE and their dispersion.
A regular projectile won't be of much use.

[Sergey Aleksandrovich]

In a caliber of this caliber, this is hardly possible or practical. What other projectile besides shrapnel would make sense to adjust the fuse? An 82mm mortar shell is a different matter; you can play around with it. It's designed for that from the start.

[bk0010]

Quote: Sergey Alexandrovich

For what other projectile besides shrapnel would it make sense to re-twist the fuse?

To 35 mm. To 57 mm.

[Sergey Aleksandrovich]

These are different calibers, so the fuses will be a different size. And with an 82mm mine, you can unscrew the tail, not just the fuse.

[Nikolaevich I]

I've noticed that many "comrades" on the VO either confuse remotely programmable fuses (RP-fuzes) with proximity fuses (NK-fuzes), or don't "fully" understand the operating principle of a RP-fuze! By and large, there are 3(!) concepts of remotely controlled fuses: 1. Non-contact fuse (NK-fuze); 2. Command-controlled fuse (KU-fuze); 3. Remotely programmable fuse (RP-fuze)! NK-fuzes and KU-fuzes are more "logical" for fighting high-speed and highly maneuverable targets! And RP-fuzes are "ideal" against stationary targets (trenches, parked vehicles) and slowly (relatively!) moving targets! NK fuses have the additional advantage that they can operate without programmers and even (in some cases!) without rangefinders! This allows for the "barrels" to be "instantly" transferred to other "azimuths"! For a DP fuse to function, many things are necessary (!): 1. A rangefinder; 2. A computing device (computer); 3. A programming device... For a KU fuse - 1. A radar for determining the range and elevation angle of the target and ammunition; 2. A computer-based computing device; 3. A command device (for example, a radio command transmitter) for detonating the ammunition at a "dangerous for the target" distance in a differential rangefinding guidance system! All 3 components of systems with DP fuses and KU fuses introduce time delays at the moment of ammunition detonation! Which can become critical when used against high-speed and highly maneuverable targets! This means the likelihood of detonating the munition at a "safe" target distance increases! This is more likely with DL fuses! (However, this "criticality" also depends on the ammunition caliber! For a 57mm shell, the "criticality" is less than for a 30-35mm shell!) So it turns out that ammunition with NK fuses, not DP fuses, should be developed first and foremost for engaging air targets! Yes...now DP fuses can prove their effectiveness against targets... low-speed (drones) or non-maneuvering (flying along a "straight" trajectory)! But evasion (maneuvering) systems/SU based on AI are already being developed! And then (after the widespread introduction of SU!) the effectiveness of munitions with DL fuses will decrease! That's why I say: Let's go with NK fuses!

[VlK]

That's why I say: Give us NK fuses!

and what exactly should he react to?

[Nikolaevich I]

Quote: VlK

What should he react to?

An NK fuse can react to various physical fields... the fuse can be either active or passive! When fighting UAVs, it is more practical to use a radio-frequency active fuse. A laser active fuse can also be tried with a 57mm caliber... Acoustic fuses (both active and passive) are possible, but there are no ready-made designs (as far as I know)! There is a magnetometric passive fuse... It turns out that for modern small-caliber anti-aircraft shells to combat "electric-propeller" drones, a radio-frequency active fuse is more suitable! Against jet and "propeller-piston" drones, passive infrared and magnetoelectric (induction) fuses are also possible! It is worth looking into acoustic fuses! Currently, shells with NK fuses have been developed (NATO!) in calibers of 25-30mm and higher!

[virA]

NK fuses have a drawback - the use of a jamming system reduces the effectiveness of this system to zero.
Therefore, other systems for targeting and detonating ammunition are widely used in air defense systems.

[Nikolaevich I]

NK fuses are available in a wide variety of designs! Radio-frequency NK-V fuses...yes, they can be more susceptible to interference than others. But radio interference hasn't killed the NK-V's radio communications, radar, radio control, or RF capabilities! And remote-programmable fuses (RPFs) can also malfunction.

[Sergey Aleksandrovich]

Oh, so many thoughts, it's hard to even read. Speaking of which, the tank's 125mm gun is armed with a guided projectile in the form of the 9K119M "Reflex-M." Even the smartest drone would be hard-pressed to avoid it.

[Nikolaevich I]

Quote: Sergey Alexandrovich

"Reflex-M." Even the smartest drone is unlikely to be able to evade it.

You are mistaken, and most likely, you simply do not have all the information!

[Sergey Aleksandrovich]

So where am I wrong? Go ahead and finish the story. I'm saying that a guided missile or interceptor drone would be much better than detonating at an inaccurate distance, which is poorly implemented due to the drone's stealth.

[Nikolaevich I]

Quote: Sergey Alexandrovich

I wrote that a guided missile or interceptor drone would be better in many ways,

I agree with that! But the Reflex probably won't be able to handle a fast drone! Because it's designed (if we're talking about shooting at aerial targets!) to counter helicopters in hover mode!

[Sergey Aleksandrovich]

Judging by some videos of our tank crews demonstrating astonishing accuracy, the shell is very effective against high-speed moving targets. Although the computer probably helped.

[Nikolaevich I]

Well, the Reflex is not a new munition! Now we have the Sokol-V and maybe the Sprint... That's something completely different! With a homing head! And the Reflex didn't perform very well even at international tank competitions - "games" (tank biathlon, I think?)! Although, a lot depends on personal skill here!

[garri-lin]

Well, NK (in your terminology) turns out to be the most expensive.
And DP can be quite inexpensive. Relatively.
And the KU is vulnerable to interference.
For mass threshers, DP is what is needed.

[Nikolaevich I]

Quote: garri-lin

NK (in your terminology) turns out to be the most expensive.
And DP can be quite inexpensive. Relatively.
And the KU is vulnerable to interference.

Non-contact fuses do not require a programmer and even a rangefinder in certain cases, and therefore can be cheaper!
The command-controlled fuse detonates once when the target is within range! But the differential rangefinding guidance system itself (using radar)...yes, it can be susceptible to interference, although in the last century it was considered one of the most promising!

[garri-lin]

You can't get there without a rangefinder.
So many different things are needed for an accurate shot that the only difference in equipment is the programmer itself. It's not that expensive.
And if you miss, the expensive projectile will be wasted.
The same applies if the target evades. So, Remotely Programmable Missiles are optimal. For targets more advanced than missiles like the Pantsirov "Nails,"

[Nikolaevich I]

Quote: garri-lin

You can't get there without a rangefinder.

Yes! Without a rangefinder, you can't hit the target with a projectile with a remotely programmable fuse! But you can with a projectile with a proximity fuse! An anti-aircraft ring sight (like on the DShK, for example) or a collimator anti-aircraft sight, like on the ZU-23-2, is sufficient for this!

[garri-lin]

Irrationally.
The expense will be enormous.

[Nikolaevich I]

Quote: garri-lin

Irrationally.
The expense will be enormous.

No...within acceptable limits!

[garri-lin]

I specifically contacted some old buddies. Who actually used the small anti-aircraft gun? For a 30mm caliber round with a non-contact fuse, it needs to be a meter and a half away from the target. Otherwise, there simply won't be enough shrapnel.
To hit a moving target like that with an open sight from a distance of a kilometer, you need not 10 or 20 shells. Much more.

[SovAr238A]

It is known that in 2016, a 57mm caliber unitary round with a programmable fuse was submitted for testing. Even then, UAVs were mentioned as a typical target for such a munition. Over the next few years, Russian industry developed similar rounds in 30mm and 23mm calibers.

Brad.
This is not the case in the military, which means it cannot be considered "as developed."
In those years they talked so much nonsense and so much “unparalleled in the world” that it made your ears turn up.
And none of this appeared either then or now.

[Phoenix Point]

I wonder why there's any doubt that Russia can't develop ammunition that meets the highest Acceptance Standards. If Taras, sitting in his stupidity in the cold, without water or sanitation, thinks his opinion matters, then he doesn't. I hope there are fewer imbeciles in Russia. For those with alternative talents, this is a breakthrough. It's only a matter of time before the initial testing and mass production. 30mm is very small. The engineers are brilliant.

[multi-category]

Quote: Phoenix Point

For the differently gifted, these are breakthroughs.

This "breakthrough" was technically feasible back in the late 1930s, 90 years ago. It's a question of technology and cost. The US managed to do it back then. The Germans did it too, but it cost two to four times more, and they didn't use it as extensively. So how much does our projectile cost?
They also developed the Krasnopol, but it's so expensive that every use costs a fortune. So the weapon exists, but it's not one that has any significant impact.
What's the goal? To decorate the exhibition or get things done?

[dementor873]

Quote: Bad_gr

that is, the projectile is detonated based not on the actual, but on the theoretically calculated speed of the projectile, which means the detonation location will be +/- several meters, which is significant when firing at UAVs.

It's unlikely that one projectile departs with a significant difference in velocity from another. They'll take the average value. A rate of fire of 550 rounds will create a sufficient fragmentation zone around the target to destroy it.

[Zaurbek]

The Su-30-34-35 carries a different 30mm cannon. It's the same size projectile.

[multi-category]

The Russian ammunition industry is responding to the demands of the times and developing new designs. Recently, it was announced that a new projectile for small-caliber artillery, capable of detonating at a predetermined point in its trajectory, is being developed.

2А42

The requirements for the shells for this weapon were about 25 years ago; they should have already been in stock, and what was important was the cost of the shell and the ability to produce it in the millions, not the fact of its availability.
Now the 2A42 gun itself is unfortunately very outdated, and the projectile...

The AHEAD round in 35×228mm caliber was developed in the late 1980s.

This was at least 35-36 years ago. The US used millions of 40mm fusing shells for the navy back during WW2.

[ofp85]

It seems odd that the new 30mm programmable round is being announced primarily for the 2A42, with barely a mention of the Pantsir. Yet, such a round would be especially useful for the anti-aircraft missile and gun system (SAM/RPG) against FPV drones, which have already disabled several systems.

In terms of hardware, the adaptation appears quite compatible: the 30x165 nomenclature is largely the same, the muzzle velocities of this family are similar (around 900–1000 m/s), and the ballistics support this. However, the problem likely lies in timing and integration. For remote detonation, the laser programmer needs to correctly program each shot (set the detonation time) and strictly synchronize this with the feed.

The 2A38M on the Pantsir has a high rate of fire. The requirements for programmer speed and the computing power of the fire control system are significantly higher than on 2A42 platforms, where the rate of fire is lower. Furthermore, development of these "smart" projectiles has been ongoing for nearly a decade. They were initially designed for the 2A42 and 2A72, and incorporating the ability to fire at a higher rate than required by these guns would have been illogical and would have unnecessarily complicated the system. Therefore, it is now easier and faster for engineers to roll out a ready-made solution for the 2A42 than to essentially develop a new KDUVPS with a laser programmer for the 2A38M anti-aircraft guns.

However, given the experience of using kamikaze drones against Pantsirs, the introduction of programmable ammunition for the 2A38M appears inevitable. The fastest way to achieve this is likely not by replacing the assault rifles themselves with 2A42s, but by using software and hardware to limit the 2A38M's rate of fire. By introducing a special mode (for example, "Kamikaze UAV") into the fire control system, which hardware-based limits the rate of fire to a level at which the programmer can physically process each projectile, the system's effectiveness against drones will increase exponentially.

[the same doctor]

It's much easier to program the detonation time as the projectile passes through the barrel. 6-8 coils per barrel, a magnetic field sensor, a simple microchip... They probably sourced ready-made parts from the Chinese again...

[Apis1962]

The ammunition is interesting, long-promised, but it's unclear how quickly the "optical detonation programming system" is programmed: during ammunition production, loading, and aiming. The only downside is that such a system isn't yet in service. The Military District has been reporting on its development for about ten years.

[Alexey Lantukh]

Unfortunately, for a number of reasons, such products have not yet entered service. However, there is every reason to expect this to happen in the foreseeable future.

It would be good at least by summer, otherwise there are always “no analogues” and in the end nothing.