Military Review

Soviet no-click

21
Soviet no-click



History creation of recoilless, as they said then dynamo-jet guns (DRP) began in the USSR in the middle of 20-ies, in the workshop of the laboratories of the Committee for Invention, led by graduate of the Faculty of Physics and Mathematics Leonid Kurchevsky.

Here, under the leadership of this extraordinary person, among other things, work was carried out on a variety of projects, such as: silent gun, air torpedo, electric machine - perpetual engine using the energy of atmospheric electricity, etc. Among other things, L.V. Kurchevsky also wrote science fiction novels.


Leonid Kurchevsky


In 1923, L.V. Kurchevsky, apparently after familiarizing himself with the pre-revolutionary works of the designer D.P. Ryabushinsky, filed an application for the invention of the dynamo - reactive gun.

Kurchevsky proposed to cut off the breech in the area of ​​the bolt from a conventional gun and insert a Laval nozzle into the cut. The rest of the gun, including the rifled barrel, remained unchanged. The shell was placed in an ordinary brass sleeve, in the bottom of which holes were drilled to exit the powder gases. The shutter was connected to the nozzle and shifted when loading. The gun had almost no recoil, and was much lighter than similar systems of this caliber.

But then the designer did not succeed in getting close to the DRP. Soon he was arrested and sentenced to 10 years for embezzling government money. While imprisoned in Solovki, Kurchevsky managed to give a good account of himself before the camp administration, at the beginning of 1929, he was released early.

Returning to Moscow, Kurchevsky launched a vigorous activity, he literally bombarded the authorities, offering dozens of types of PDD capable, in his opinion, to replace all existing types of guns.
This found a warm response from many high-ranking civilian and military leaders, and M.N., who had no serious education, became the most ardent supporter of the PDD. Tukhachevsky.

It was assumed that the guns of Kurchevsky, in addition to field artillery, will replace conventional guns with a loaded barrel in anti-aircraft artillery, tower guns tanks, anti-tank guns, and even casemate guns in fortified areas. True, it was unclear what to do with the release of powder gases when firing through a nozzle in the breech of the DRP, which is a great danger to the service staff, especially in confined spaces.

In a short time many guns of all possible calibers were created.
Kurchevsky DRP was intended for all types of troops and were of two types: breech-loading with manual loading and automatic with burning sleeves of nitrotex. Huge resources were spent on the development and launch into production of DRP. At the beginning-middle of the 30's, the Kurchevsky cannons ranged from 30 to 50% of the orders of artillery factories. DRP began to massively be supplied to the army.


37-mm gun RK


For the infantry were intended: anti-tank portable 37-mm gun RK and 76-mm battalion BOD. Mountain divisions received a 76-mm HPP cannon.


76-mm battalion BOD


For cavalry and motorized units were intended: 76-mm MPK gun on the chassis of the Harley-Devitson motorcycle and 76-mm SEC on the chassis of the Ford-A.


76-mm MPK gun on the chassis of the Harley-Devitson motorcycle



76-mm SEC on the chassis of the passenger "Ford-A"



Divisions and corps received 152 and 305-mm DRP on the chassis of three-axle trucks


Total artillery factories produced about 5000 DRP. Of these, military acceptance took only about 2000, and the troops got around 1000. The situation was aggravated by the fact that Kurchevsky was constantly changing the drawings of the systems put into production; the proportion of manufacturing defects was large.

Soon the "bubble" of the dynamo - jet guns burst. It turned out that the armor-piercing shells of anti-tank DRP, even when fired at point-blank range, are not able to penetrate armor that is thicker than 30-mm. The accuracy and range of field artillery guns do not meet the requirements at all. At the same time, the guns themselves are unreliable and unsafe during operation, there have been numerous cases of rupture of barrels during firing.


Fighter I-Z with 76-mm DRP APK


aviation and marine automatic guns of Kurchevsky caliber from 37 to 152 mm gave constant failures and delays when firing due to incomplete combustion of nitrotissue shells and unreliable operation of the pneumatic reloading mechanism, which made it weapon absolutely not combat-ready.

Soon all the PDDs were removed from the troops and destroyed. By 22 June 1941, in service with the Red Army there was not a single Kurchevsky gun. Kurchevsky himself was convicted and executed in 1937 year, according to the verdict of the Military Collegium of the USSR Supreme Court.

The adventurism of Kurchevsky and his high-ranking patrons cost dearly to our armed forces, in addition to significant material losses on the production of obviously defective guns, the idea of ​​off-the-track turned out to be discredited for many years. These weapons could occupy their niche as light anti-tank weapons and fire support for infantry. Recoilless guns in combination with cumulative projectiles proved their viability during the Second World War, while in service in the armies of the United States and Germany.


German anti-tank recoilless gun LG-40



American 75-mm recoilless gun M-20


In the USSR, during the war years, work was carried out on the creation of such systems, but they entered service only in the post-war period. The first was the 82-mm heavy machine antitank grenade launcher SPG-82.
In 1950, the complex consisting of an 82-mm LNG-82 antitank anti-tank grenade launcher and a caliber anti-tank cumulative anti-tank grenade PG-82 was adopted by the Soviet army.


LNG-82


LNG-82 had a smooth thin-walled barrel, without grooves, consisting of two parts: muzzle and breech, which were connected to each other by a clutch. The barrel was mounted on a machine with a wheel course, which allowed to carry a grenade launcher on the battlefield and set the barrel in a combat or field position.

To protect the calculation from the action of powder gases, the grenade launcher had a light folding shield and a protective apron under it. In addition, at the muzzle of the barrel was attached a special socket - gas collector. Glazed viewing windows in the shield were automatically overlapped with protective metal flaps when fired.
The grenade launcher was serviced by three people: the gunner, the loader and the grenade carrier.

Subsequently, the OG-82 fragmentation grenade was added to the ammunition and the grenade launcher was upgraded. In the process of modernization, the firing mechanism began with a self-propelled trigger, the fixed shoulder rest was replaced with a retractable one, and a sight was set for shooting fragmentation grenades. New grenade launcher using cumulative PG-82 grenades and fragmentation FG-82, received the designation SG-82

The mass of the LNG-82 grenade launcher with a machine gun was 38 kg, which was many times less than the mass of conventional artillery guns of a similar caliber. The range of a direct shot of a mounted grenade launcher significantly exceeded the range of a direct shot of a hand-held anti-tank grenade launcher RPG-2 and was 200 m. Maximum range: 1500 m. Grenade PG-82 had a mass of 4,5 kg and provided 175 armor penetration mm. Rate of Fire: 6 shots per minute.

At the beginning of the 50 of the last century, the USSR Ministry of Defense, represented by the Main Artillery Directorate (GAU), announced a competition to create an 82 mm recoilless gun with improved production technology, weighing no more than 82 kg, and armor 100-200 mm , the ability to defeat manpower and light fortifications of the enemy type field at a distance of at least 250 m.

The winner of the competition was the Special Design Bureau (SKB-4), now the Engineering Design Bureau (KBM, Kolomna) under the direction of B.I. Shavyrina.

The SKB-4 development tool presented to the competition commission was a dynamo-reactive design with a loaded barrel and a wide chamber and nozzle. The barrel was connected by means of a hinge with a fairly simple design tripod-carriage, which had a removable wheel travel, with which the gun was moved by the calculation for short distances. Lifting and turning mechanisms - screw type. Aim devices provided firing both direct and semi-direct fire and from a closed firing position.


Recoilless 82 mm B-10 gun


In 1954, the X-NUMX-mm B-82 recoilless gun was put into service, its production continued until the 10 year. With a mass of 1964 kg, the gun could fire targets at a distance of up to 85 m, firing up to 4500 shells per minute. Effective range for shooting brontsel to 7 m, armor penetration to 400-mm.



In the Soviet Army, the gun served as an anti-tank vehicle for motorized rifle and paratroop battalions.



It was exported to the countries participating in the Warsaw Pact, also to Algeria, Angola, Afghanistan, Vietnam, Egypt, North Korea, Cambodia, China, Cuba, Mongolia, Syria.

In parallel with the 82-mm recoilless gun B-10, SKB-4 developed a more powerful 107-mm system. In terms of its design, it was largely similar to the B-10, using a similar design and principle of operation, which greatly simplified further mass production.


Recoilless 107 mm B-11 gun


The weight of the B-11 in the combat position was 305 kg. 5 firing rate / min. For destruction of equipment and structures used cumulative ammunition BK-883 (MK-11), with an effective range of up to 1400 m, with armor penetration to 381-mm. O-883A high-explosive ordnance (MO-11) with a maximum range of up to 6600 m is used to destroy enemy personnel.



The shells are drop-shaped and equipped with a GK-2 fuse, charging system with a centered disc, main charge, primer and additional charge.



When fired, the powder gases are ejected back from the gun, creating a dangerous zone up to 40 meters in length. The gun can be towed at speeds up to 60 km / h, rolled manually or carried in the form of three main components: the trunk, the frame, the wheels.

B-11 produced simultaneously with the B-10 and was in service with motorized rifle and airborne troops of the Soviet Army. At present, this weapon is used mainly by the armies of the states of Asia and Africa.

Unlike the Kurchevsky DRP, all post-war Soviet recoilless guns had a smooth barrel and were adapted for fired anti-tank cumulative shells. In the future, there was an erasure of the line between caliber recoilless anti-tank guns and easel anti-tank grenade launchers.

This trend was reflected in the creation of the 73-mm LNG-9 "Spear" anti-tank grenade launcher. Despite the name, it is constructively fully recoverable weapon.


Grenade launcher CPG-9 "Spear"


Grenade launcher CPG-9 "Spear" was adopted by the Armed Forces of the USSR in 1963 year. His appearance led to the desire to increase the range of effective fire of anti-tank weapons of motorized rifle units. The initial speed of the grenade at departure is 435 m / s. After the shot, the jet engine accelerates the grenade to 700 m / s. High speed provides the best flatness of the trajectory, reduces the time of flight of the grenade, which allows to reduce the magnitude of the corrections for side wind and target movement.
The range of fire at Bronzelem to 800 m, the maximum firing range of a fragmentation grenade - 4500 m. The rate of fire - 6 rds / min.



The LNG-9 calculation consists of four people: a commander, a gunner, a loader, and a sub-carrier. The crew is capable of carrying a grenade launcher in a disassembled (traveling) position for long distances, as well as moving the LNG-9 in a combat position when changing firing positions. The largest mass of the grenade launcher (with a night sight) reaches 57,6 kg.



The armor penetrability of the cumulative PG-9В round grenade is 300 mm, and the upgraded PG-9ВС round grenade is 400 mm. This was quite enough to defeat tanks of all types that did not have dynamic protection in the 60-70 years. LNG-9 has been widely exported and has been effectively used in many armed conflicts.



Reliability of action and high armor penetration with a small caliber of grenades (total 73 mm) served as the basis for the development of 73А2 XMUM guns "Thunder" and PG-28В shotgun, which were included in the BMP-15 infantry fighting vehicle complex.



Despite a decent age, the LNG-9 continues to be in service with the Russian army.

Currently, ATGMs and hand-held anti-tank grenade launchers (RPGs) have practically displaced recoilless guns from the armies of the most developed countries. At the same time, many technical solutions tested in no recoil continue to be used in ATGM launchers and in caliber anti-tank grenade launchers.


Based on:
http://www.plam.ru/tehnauka/tainy_russkoi_artillerii_poslednii_dovod_carei_i_komissarov_s_illyustracijami/p7.php
http://cris9.armforc.ru/rva_b10.htm
http://russianarms.mybb.ru/viewtopic.php?id=993
http://commi.narod.ru/txt/shirad/130.htm
Author:
21 comment
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. wanderer_032
    wanderer_032 April 1 2014 09: 10
    +5
    The most partisan gun. wink
    Unlike the classic VET, it is lightweight and easy to use. yes
    These things must be preserved, they may come in handy. bully
    1. wanderer_032
      wanderer_032 April 1 2014 09: 14
      +12
      Here is a reliable and tested option so as not to carry on yourself:



      1. Mister X
        Mister X April 1 2014 15: 00
        +8
        Still from the movie "Red Scorpion"
        Dolph Lundgren at the M40 non-recoil on the road.

        1. Bongo
          April 1 2014 15: 14
          +7
          We also put on UAZ and LUAZ, but on a much smaller scale than in the west.
          1. wanderer_032
            wanderer_032 April 1 2014 16: 00
            +5
            Quote: Bongo
            We also put on UAZ and LUAZ, but on a much smaller scale than in the west.

            On the TPK LUAZ-967 this is generally a great thing, it is small and can be hidden behind any small hill or driven into a small natural hollow.
            For ambushes on columns, a very good option, especially with spare positions for firing.
            He shot and quickly moved away.
        2. Mister X
          Mister X April 1 2014 16: 04
          +3
          This found a warm response from many high-ranking civilian and military leaders, and M.N., who had no serious education, became the most ardent supporter of the PDD. Tukhachevsky.
          Author Sergey Linnik

          After the arrest of Tukhachevsky in 1937, many weapons systems developed with his support were subjected to critical analysis.
          In particular, in tests carried out on 11 on November 1937 from 80 shells fired from two Kurchevsky rifles from a distance of 100 m into the T-26 light tank, not a single armor was pierced, and the 11 shots fell in misfires.
          One gun failed, because during reloading the projectile in the barrel warped.
          On the basis of such test results, the Kurchevsky rifles were withdrawn from service and sent for re-melting, and the dynamo-reactive weapon systems were declared “wrecking equipment” and work on them was stopped.
    2. GRANATE-19
      GRANATE-19 April 2 2014 22: 13
      +4
      Quote: wanderer_032
      The most partisan gun. wink
      Unlike the classic VET, it is lightweight and easy to use. yes
      These things must be preserved, they may come in handy. bully

      Trust me, it's not easy! I dealt with this thing in the mountains, it weighs under 50 kg together with the sight! If you set it as a "station" and there are pros, and there is not one pipe (especially in the mountains), then "ALL HANA" has a good range (not a gun, but it is lighter), because of the speed, the accuracy increases, and the stock " shots "to it in the warehouses (I fired grenades in the mid-90s, judging by the OTK - 1976), in general, there is still potential! And in the Second Chechen I saw such shaitan-pipes attached to the "matalygs" (MTLB, "corpse carriage" - the vehicle was often used by doctors and it was often used to transport LOAD-200), in my opinion it was the 15MSP they had the whole regiment on "matalygs" and on all by "SPEED". It would be interesting to hear their stories about the use of SPG-9m. Respectfully, I express my humble opinion.
    3. The comment was deleted.
  2. Nikolaevich I
    Nikolaevich I April 1 2014 09: 48
    +4
    For some reason, Kurchevsky did not manage to do anything worthwhile out of 37mm recoillessness (most likely from the fact that he "overcomplicated"). But the Swedes made an anti-tank 20mm recoilless recoil with armor-piercing no worse than the existing 20mm anti-tank rifles of the traditional type. It is also a pity that at one time did not launch the Kolos MANPADS. I think that, as an anti-helicopter guerrilla weapon, the Kolos would be relevant now.
    1. svp67
      svp67 April 1 2014 18: 31
      +6
      Quote: Nikolaevich I
      For some reason, Kurchevsky did not manage to do anything worthwhile out of 37mm recoil (most likely from the fact that he "overcomplicated")

      The main mistake of Kurchevsky is that he used rifled, so-called "loaded" barrels on his DRP, he just had to use a smooth barrel ...
  3. La-5
    La-5 April 1 2014 09: 50
    +4
    A thing is good and reliable, and in the case of hostilities in the city, it is irreplaceable.
  4. Dragon-y
    Dragon-y April 1 2014 09: 51
    -2
    Oh, hurry Kurchevsky, it was necessary to work more ...
  5. Leader
    Leader April 1 2014 10: 44
    +13
    Kurchevsky is an uneducated adventurer, searchlight, waster of folk remedies.
    He was shot correctly - you have to bear responsibility for your words and deeds.
    It would be necessary to introduce the same punishment now - and the first to slap Mr. Serdyukov for his "reforms" of our army.
    And then - all these lackeys in general uniforms from the General Staff of the Ministry of Defense, faithfully fulfilling any extravagant ideas of a furniture maker, not forgetting about their pockets.
  6. Bongo
    April 1 2014 13: 29
    +14
    The article did not include the unique 406-mm recoilless C-103, designed by V.G. Grabin at the beginning of the 50's for nuclear warheads.
  7. Manul
    Manul April 1 2014 15: 05
    +2
    I read an interesting artistic story about the war, unfortunately I do not remember either the author or the name. It tells how during the German offensive (like near Leningrad near Lomonosov) almost 4 recoilless guns were found in the museum, to which some shells approached. It was decided to use the guns on the front line - the enemy was advancing and each barrel counted. I don’t remember the fate of the others, but one was set at a height and with each attack she slowly snapped so, holding at sight the only road with the possibility of a breakthrough. The Germans brought down hurricane mortar and artillery fire at the position, and the crew smoked in the hole at that time. Then the soldiers went to the plowed strip, dug up this gun, shook it off the ground and moved to another place - there will still be a direct hit, but nothing brittle this gun was not - no bolts, no sights (aiming directly at the barrel directly aimed) Maybe someone read, remembers the name of the work?
    1. Bongo
      April 1 2014 15: 17
      +4
      Quote: Manul
      this gun was nothing brittle

      Most likely this is fiction. In any case, on recoilless guns there is a bolt and a pick-up mechanism, so there is something to break.
      1. anomalocaris
        anomalocaris April 2 2014 02: 20
        0
        The funny thing is, the recoilless Kurchevsky shutter did not have.
    2. Nayhas
      Nayhas April 2 2014 08: 19
      +1
      Quote: Manul
      It tells how during the German offensive (like near Leningrad near Lomonosov) almost 4 recoilless guns were found in the museum, to which some shells approached. It was decided to use the guns on the front line - the enemy was advancing and each barrel counted. I don’t remember the fate of the others, but one was set at a height and with each attack she slowly snapped so, holding at sight the only road with the possibility of a breakthrough. The Germans brought down hurricane mortar and artillery fire at the position, and the crew smoked in the hole at that time. Then the soldiers went to the plowed strip, dug up this gun, shook it off the ground and moved to another place - there will still be a direct hit, but nothing brittle this gun was not - no bolts, no sights (aiming directly at the barrel directly aimed) Maybe someone read, remembers the name of the work?

      I read this ooooooooooo very long ago, only there was about the defense of Sevastopol and the guns were not recoilless, but from the first breech-loading. Like the barrel, mounts and a minimum of sights, the caliber seems 76mm. Because the barrel was thick for him the shellings of the Germans were equally divided by direct fire from the hill. And this gun was taken from the Sevastopol Museum.
  8. alex-cn
    alex-cn April 1 2014 16: 23
    +7
    Sobolev had such a story, and not about Peter, but about Odessa, and the gun there was not recoilless, but some of the early three-inch ones that the sailors found in the museum.
    L. Sobolev. Odessa stories. A gun without a fly.
    1. alex-cn
      alex-cn April 1 2014 19: 15
      +3
      Blame, partially lied, Sevastopol, Sevastopol stories, the name is correct.
      1. Manul
        Manul April 2 2014 10: 44
        +1
        Quote: alex-cn
        Sevastopol, Sevastopol stories, Cannon without a fly.


        hi Thank you! This is exactly the story! Let me mess up - but about Sevastopol! soldier wink
  9. Sledgehammer
    Sledgehammer April 1 2014 19: 57
    +4
    Thanks to the author, the article is interesting.
  10. Alf
    Alf April 1 2014 22: 24
    +5
    Quote: Dragon-y
    Oh, hurry Kurchevsky, it was necessary to work more ...

    That would be glad Adolf Aloizych.
    1. 52
      52 April 3 2014 17: 55
      +1
      And what is the idea = a tray, a muzzle loading, high cost of production ... Yes, a shylkrupper would carry "repressed unrecognized heynies"
  11. understudy
    understudy April 1 2014 22: 58
    +1
    "The severity of the consequences of the adventurous decision was aggravated by the fact that M.N. Tukhachevsky, occupying the post of chief of armaments of the Red Army, decided to completely rearm the artillery of the Red Army with recoilless guns..."

    Only for this it was necessary to send on the rack.
  12. Uhe
    Uhe April 2 2014 01: 38
    +4
    An acquaintance in the early 60s served as the commander of the B-10, in the artillery. Basically, they taught them to act against tanks. She says it was an unforgettable impression when this fool shot - there was a terrible roar and fire from all sides. The infantry feared them and respected them for this roar and fire. But taking into account the 200 m defeat of the tank, sometimes they did not have time to bring the gun into battle during the exercises - they were thrown into positions, they begin to turn around, and the tanks already went into battle, managed to drive up, poke a cannon at them, the tanker climbed out of the hatch and joked. So the death row. Well at least then I didn't have to fight.
  13. Bongo
    April 2 2014 05: 58
    +3
    Quote: anomalocaris
    the recoilless Kurchevsky shutter did not have

    Why would it be, and how then did they charge at all? Read the article carefully, everything about the KDP of Kurchevsky is described in detail.
    1. anomalocaris
      anomalocaris April 4 2014 16: 02
      +1
      They charged from the barrel. Kurtchevsky’s non-recoil was a trunk with a sawn shutter to which a Laval nozzle was attached. Simple, cheap, but not a damn thing angry. For loading, I had to invent a special shell, a burning cartridge case (very expensive and not always burning), a special mechanism that sends out a shell, a special tray (here it is guaranteed to fly out through the nozzle to a distance of up to 400 m).
      About 5000 of these banduras were made, but only their combat value was zero, and if we take into account the ditched planes, where they tried to install these units, then negative.
      Bongo, I don’t really need to read an article, I myself can write about a dozen of them.
      1. Bongo
        April 5 2014 13: 39
        +3
        Bongo, I don’t really need to read an article, I myself can write about a dozen of them.
        Strange position No. all the more so in the article about the DRP shutter and burning-out liners made of nitrotissue everything is described in detail.
  14. Volga Cossack
    Volga Cossack 26 February 2016 19: 06
    -1
    good article! thank!