Military Review

Cannon fodder, or conversations about the present and future of ship artillery

37
Cannon fodder, or conversations about the present and future of ship artillery

In the photo 57-mm naval artillery installation Mk. 110 company BAE Systems. The company believes that ship guns are becoming increasingly popular in modern warfare, and at the same time there is a growing need for systems that can deal with a variety of goals.


The guns for several centuries have been a key component of the fighting at sea. And today, their importance is still high, and in connection with technological progress and lower operating costs, ship artillery systems are attracting more and more interest.

Shipboard artillery systems vary quite a lot: from 7,62-mm or 12,7-mm machine guns, such as in the OTO Melara / Finmeccanica Hitrole Light installation (now Leonardo-Finmeccanica; from January 1, 2017 was just Leonardo), the family of near Raytheon Phalanx or Thales Goalkeeper, and ending with the 155-mm advanced artillery system from BAE Systems Advanced Gun System, installed on new American Zamvolt class destroyers. On this broad field, a number of new trends are emerging, new technologies are developing in the form of rail guns and lasers that can completely change the concept of ship artillery. “But today, guns have many advantages and over the next fifty years, their potential will allow them to strengthen their positions that they have gained over the past several generations,” said Eric Wertheim, an expert on naval weapons at the US Navy Institute. “They can play a very important role.”


155-mm Advanced Gun System gun mount installed on new American Zamvolt class destroyers

The German company Rheinmetall specializes in small calibers, from 20 mm to 35 mm. In its portfolio, it has two main systems of the 20 mm caliber: the manual installation of the Oerlikon GAM-B01 20 mm and the new product, the remote-controlled Oerlikon Searanger 20 gun. In addition, in the 35 mm category, the company offers the Oerlikon Millennium Gun. Vice President of Rheinmetall Craig McLaughlin said that the basic concept of naval guns remained almost the same as a hundred years ago. “The technology of a typical cannon with a projectile in the barrel ... it’s hard to do something better, and indeed some of the old projects are as good today as they were when they were created ... I don’t think we will see in the future new players creating new weapon systems, because the infrastructure and experience you need for this are few companies capable of creating something worthwhile, and if you just want to develop new guns, then it is in fact not economically viable. ” However, Mr. Maklokhlin noted that there are a number of related areas, supply systems, optics, electronics, mechanics, hydraulics, ammunition, in which progress moves by leaps and bounds. For example, Rheinmetall supplies propellants to ammunition manufacturers throughout Europe and considers this a promising area for future innovations. He also noted continuous progress in stabilization and guidance systems. "The best gun in the world is useless if you have a not very good aiming system."


20-mm installation Oerlikon Searanger German company Rheinmetall

Business Development Director at BAE Systems, John Perry, agreed with McLaughlin, saying that “although the fundamentals, such as how a gun works and how it looks, have not changed over the years, the technologies inside the gun and shells have undergone great changes.” BAF Systems manufactures a wide range of naval installations and ammunition for them, from 25-mm to the above-mentioned Advanced Gun System, which fires with a long-range Long Range Land Attack Projectile high-precision projectile. In addition, its 40-mm Mk.4 and 57-mm Mk.3 shipboard installations are installed on corvettes and coastal patrol vessels, and its portfolio also includes the 25-mm installation Mk.38 and 127-mm installation Mk.45.


On the photo is the Hitrole weapon system. Leonardo-Finmecannica becomes an influential player in the naval artillery market after joining OTO Melara


Shipborne gunnery Mk4 40 mm by BAE Systems

Mr Perry said that in an era of constrained defense budgets, a company must develop cost-effective solutions that meet the needs of fleets from around the world. One of the ways is the development of universal precision-guided munitions. He noted the Standard Guided Projectile, developed by the company for the US Navy, and the Hyper Velocity Projectile hypersonic projectile, which will allow to fight different types of targets. The nature of threats is changing, and fleets must take into account the growing danger of widespread cheap threats. This increases the importance of naval artillery and increases the need for systems that could deal with threats of different types. “The changing nature of threats to offshore platforms makes us raise the level of versatility of ship installations,” Perry explained. - With the proliferation of cheap and massively applied threats, the need for precise impact and versatility has increased significantly. Customers are currently seeking to supplement their missile systems with ship artillery with high-precision and versatile capabilities. ” He further noted that in the last 10-15 years there has been a significant technological progress in ship artillery, including automated ammunition processing systems, fire control software, sensors, guidance systems, actuators, as well as the barrels themselves. However, he drew attention to the development in the field of guided munitions, noting that they are an economically viable alternative to missiles in many combat missions. “Compared to rockets, guided munitions cost less, they are much more in the store, they can be replenished at sea and often the impact on the target is more in tune with its importance.


The Remote-controlled Narwhal installation from NEXTER comes in two versions: 20A and 20V. Armed with French fleet Narwhal is composed along with other systems

Споры

The potential of guns as an alternative to missiles in some combat scenarios, especially in our financially tense times, was also noted by Mr. Wertheim, who highlighted the potential of 114,3-mm (4,5 ") and 127-mm guns used as fire support vehicles." You have to get closer, and this is dangerous with guns, since the distance is not as great as in the case of rockets. But the advantage lies in deeper stores, so you simply can’t compare projectiles, you’ll do hundreds of shots before ezapas and cost compared to multi-million dollar missiles at all penny. "

“Still, the potential of guns as an alternative to rockets does not need to be so overstated,” objected McLaughlin. - Not that the guns are trying to do the work of rockets, but there was a time when rockets really unrealistically multiplied, but they are not so useful when working within the ship’s near perimeter, 1,6 nautical miles or three kilometers. But further missiles have the benefits .... From my point of view, the correct argument is when is it good to have one system, say a gun, and when is it better to have another type of weapon, such as missiles? ”

According to one of the main producers, there is also an increase in demand for systems for small vessels. This had an obvious effect on the demand for different calibers. “Small speedboats, sometimes built by novices with experience only in the civilian market, are requested by fleets, coast guards and police,” said a representative of Finmeccanica. “As a rule, they are armed with small-caliber systems.” Finmeccanica became one of the main European suppliers of ship guns after the purchase of OTO Melara at the beginning of this year. The company focuses on systems of calibers 40 mm, 76 mm and 127 mm. He further noted that the market has changed in recent years: “the demand for large-caliber and medium-caliber guns has decreased due to the reduction in the number of large ships, but the demand for small calibers has increased, from 12,4 mm to 40 mm.”

They are used to equip small vessels that are in service with fleets and police around the world. Based on the growing defense budgets of countries in the Asia-Pacific region, Finmeccanica regards it as a possible direction for future growth in ship gun sales. A representative of this company also noted an increase in prospects in Africa, but said that "the available market may be limited due to the presence of Chinese players." The representative of the French Nexter also drew attention to the growing demand for small-caliber systems, especially for 12,7 mm and 20 mm. The company believes that "the market for ship guns is growing, especially for light remote-controlled systems." Nexter manufactures two ultralight shipboard installations 15A and 15B, as well as the Narwhal remotely controlled system in two versions, 20A and 20B.


French Nexter has in its portfolio two easy installations 15А and 15В. The company believes that the market for ship guns is growing


The caliber 76 mm is one of the main activities of the company Finmeccanica. On the photo, the 76 / 62 Super Rapid lightweight rapid installation

Future hit

Much work is being done on the creation of ship-based weapons systems operating on different physical principles, a number of new technologies attracting close attention. As an example, the EMRG (Electromagnetic Rail Gun) electromagnetic rail gun, which uses electricity instead of gunpowder and, according to the report of Ronald O'Rourke, a specialist in naval systems from the Congress Research Service, can accelerate shells to speeds from 7240 to 9000 km / h BAE Systems is working with the US Navy to develop this weapon system. Mr Perry said that “hitting the right side of the cost curve for this type of technology will put a huge burden on the adversary’s ability to react and neutralize such weapon systems.”

According to the report of O'Rourke, in the course of the work of the American fleet on the creation of an electromagnetic gun, they realized that the guided projectile developed for this system could also be fired from conventional 127 mm and 155 mm guns. This will significantly increase the speed of projectiles fired from these guns. For example, when firing 127-mm guns, the projectile can reach the speed 3 of Mach number (approximately 2000 knots / 3704 km / h depending on the height). Although it is half the speed that a projectile can reach when firing a rail cannon, it is more than twice the speed of a conventional 127-mm projectile.


Experimental electromagnetic rail gun at the research center in Dahlgren

The third direction of promising developments are laser systems. In the 2009-2012 years, the US Navy experienced a prototype solid-state laser on UAVs in a series of combat launches. In the 2010-2011 years, the fleet tested another laser prototype under the designation Maritime Laser Demostration (MID), which, according to the report, hit a small boat. Also on the American ship Ponce, stationed in the Persian Gulf, a laser weapon system was installed “with the help of which we evaluate the performance of ship-borne lasers in the operational space, in which there are clusters of boats and UAVs”.

A number of companies engaged in business in the field of maritime weapons systems, declare a special interest in the laser arms. Mat Pryor, director of business development at MSI-Dcfense Systems (MSI-DS), said that “we anticipate destructive technologies like laser systems that will complement or replace guns during 20-30 years with decreasing size and weight of laser systems and necessary power supply systems. MSI-DS launches the Seahawk family of shipboard installations, which includes three models: the original Seahawk installation for 25-mm, 30-mm and 40-mm guns; Seahawk Light Weight (LW) installation for 14,5 mm, 20 mm, 23 mm and 25 mm guns; and Seahawk Ultra Light Weight for 7,62-mm and 12,7-mm machine guns.

For its part, in February 2016, the German company Rheinmetall and the Bundeswehr, successfully tested the High Energy Energy HEL (High Energy Laser) mounted on a German warship. The company reported that the HEL laser system with a power of 10 kW was installed on the MLG 27 lightweight ship installation. A test program was conducted whereby the laser tracked potential targets, such as small vessels and drones. The HEL laser machine also worked on land stationary targets.


Laser gun HEL power 10 kW installed on a light ship installation MLG 27

McLaughlin believes that the fight against low-flying and slow-flying small targets, such as drones, will become a priority for ship-mounted installations, and in this connection air-blasting munitions will have the advantage. “You have two aspects. First, do you see the goal? Therefore, you need systems that reliably and efficiently detect UAVs ... and further, how are you really going to hit the target? The probability of getting a shell right into the apple is not so great. Therefore, I believe that users are ever more closely looking at alternative types of ammunition, including air explosions. ”

Wertheim warned that new technologies being investigated in the USA and other countries are still in the early stages of their development. However, he noted that in the next decade, they may be able to have a significant influence on the fleets' vision of the ship artillery concept. “We have not yet achieved what we want. A lot of theoretical. But after 5-10, the practical share will increase and our confidence in the new systems will reach the next level. ”

Materials used:
www.leonardocompany.com
www.baesystems.com
www.rheinmetall.com
www.nexter-group.fr
www.navsea.navy.mil
www.wikipedia.org
en.wikipedia.org
Author:
37 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. corporal
    corporal 12 July 2016 06: 22
    +2
    For guided munitions, it is unclear where they are more inclined. Changing the trajectory, or programmable undermining? Or two in one?
    1. venik
      venik 12 July 2016 08: 25
      -3
      Quote: Corporal
      For guided munitions, it is unclear where they are more inclined. Changing the trajectory, or programmable undermining? Or two in one?


      Both!
      True, the corrected trajectory is mainly for large caliber. For small calibers there is only a 57-mm Russian shell (and even that is still in the testing phase). The rest have not yet reached this ...
      1. psiho117
        psiho117 12 July 2016 12: 24
        +8
        Quote: venik
        For small calibers there is only a 57-mm Russian projectile ... The rest have not yet reached this ...

        Patriotism is good; Ur patriotism based on lack of awareness is bad.
        This is not "The others have not gotten yet", it is we finally got there, on skis.
        They tested 35mm corrected shells back in the 80s of the last century, but at that time, the sheepskin was not worth the hassle.
        And in the 57mm caliber, the Americans showed an ORCA shell several years ago ...
        1. venik
          venik 12 July 2016 21: 15
          +1
          Quote: psiho117
          They tested correctable 35mm shells back in the 80s of the last century, but at that time, the sheepskin was not worth the effort. And in the 57mm caliber, the Americans showed ORCA several years ago ...


          And you can from this place in more detail! Do you have any links? As far as I know, the 35-mm projectile of the development of the 80s had a remote fuse, and not an adjustable trajectory with homing at the target! And as for ORCA, I will also ask for a reference or details !! And then a small misunderstanding comes out - this thing still exists in the form of layouts, and it is intended for shooting at inactive targets!
          1. Come on
            Come on 14 July 2016 01: 08
            0
            Quote: venik
            For small calibers there is only a 57-mm Russian projectile (and even that is still in the testing phase)


            Do you already have a programmable Russian 57mm shell? This is where you can find out, because the guns also mean redo? And then, on what principle is accurate detonation implemented? The 57mm Bofors programmable projectile, which has been around for a long time, has a programmable number of revolutions that the projectile makes at the right distance (measured by a laser rangefinder) and so realize an accurate detonation. Here, by the way, is a movie about 57mm Bofors.
            1. venik
              venik 14 July 2016 14: 06
              0
              Quote: Yeah, well.
              Do you already have a programmable Russian 57mm shell? This is where you can find out, because the guns also mean redo?


              Dear Yes, well! In general, shells with remote detonation are known and have been used since the end of the XNUMXth century !!! (search the Internet for "Shrapnel shells"). Accuracy was true +/- one galoshes ... Nevertheless! I actually mean the CORRECTED (ie homing) shells !!! If you read carefully.

              So here, at the KADEX-2016 exhibition, the Director of the Central Research Institute "Burevestnik" told the following (I quote):
              ===
              This task was not easy. It was much more difficult to create such a projectile for a 57-mm caliber than to develop such ammunition for the Coalition-SV self-propelled gun, which has a 152-mm gun.

              The guided artillery shell (UAS) was created at Tochmash Design Bureau under the improved Petrel artillery system based on the S-60 gun, created back in the mid-40s.

              Glider UAS made by the aerodynamic scheme "duck". The loading and firing scheme is similar to regular ammunition. The plumage of the projectile consists of 4 wings laid in a sleeve that are deflected by a steering gear located in the bow of the projectile. It works from free air flow. The photodetector of the laser radiation of the guidance system on the target is located in the end part and is closed by a pallet, which is separated in flight.

              The mass of warheads is 2 kilograms, explosives - 400 grams, which corresponds to the mass of the explosives of a standard artillery shell of 76 mm caliber. Especially for the ZAK-57 "Derivation-Air Defense" a multifunctional projectile with a remote fuse is also being developed, the features of which are not disclosed. Standard shells of 57 mm caliber - fragmentation tracer and armor-piercing shells will also be used.

              UAS is fired from a rifled barrel in the direction of the target or at the calculated anticipated point. Guidance is carried out on a laser beam. Firing range - from 200 m to 6-8 km for manned targets and up to 3-5 km for unmanned.

              To detect, track the target and aim the projectile, a tele-thermal imaging control system with automatic capture and tracking is used, equipped with a laser range finder and a laser guidance channel. The optoelectronic control system ensures the use of the complex at any time of the day in any weather. There is the possibility of shooting not only from a place, but also from the move.

              PS The source, unfortunately, did not record, but copied the article! The name "A cannon capable of competing with an anti-aircraft missile". If you want, look in the Internet!
        2. venik
          venik 13 July 2016 14: 24
          +1
          Pancake! Well, how unpleasant to listen to nonsense!
          Quote: psiho117
          They tested 35mm corrected shells back in the 80s of the last century, but at that time, the sheepskin was not worth the hassle.


          Yes, they did not test 35 mm adjustable shells, but REMOTE EXPLOSION shells !!!
          By the way, at the end of the 80s, similar developments were carried out in the USSR (for BMP-2 guns !!! Only then it was not possible to create a projectile of the required accuracy and reliability. It turned out terribly expensive and ineffective (they often worked with a flight and undershoot). was "fucked" until better times!

          Quote: psiho117
          And in the 57mm caliber, the Americans showed an ORCA shell several years ago ...


          Firstly - OPKAC (Ordnance for Rapid Kill of Attack Craft) was introduced to the "general public" a little over a year ago !!! (at the end of August 2015) !!! Moreover - in the form of a plastic model !!!!! Moreover, it was stated that the DESIGN work is still ongoing !!!!!
          It remains to add that this development is intended solely for the destruction of small-sized surface-mounted targets! There is NO information that this operating time has reached the level of TESTS - NO !!!

          PS From the "pros" "-" I accept with DEEP RESPECT (I actually don't give a damn about "+" and "-"), but when "-" - comfort DILETANTS - evil takes! Understand first - then pop!
        3. venik
          venik 13 July 2016 14: 24
          +1
          Pancake! Well, how unpleasant to listen to nonsense!
          Quote: psiho117
          They tested 35mm corrected shells back in the 80s of the last century, but at that time, the sheepskin was not worth the hassle.


          Yes, they did not test 35 mm adjustable shells, but REMOTE EXPLOSION shells !!!
          By the way, at the end of the 80s, similar developments were carried out in the USSR (for BMP-2 guns !!! Only then it was not possible to create a projectile of the required accuracy and reliability. It turned out terribly expensive and ineffective (they often worked with a flight and undershoot). was "fucked" until better times!

          Quote: psiho117
          And in the 57mm caliber, the Americans showed an ORCA shell several years ago ...


          Firstly - OPKAC (Ordnance for Rapid Kill of Attack Craft) was introduced to the "general public" a little over a year ago !!! (at the end of August 2015) !!! Moreover - in the form of a plastic model !!!!! Moreover, it was stated that the DESIGN work is still ongoing !!!!!
          It remains to add that this development is intended solely for the destruction of small-sized surface-mounted targets! There is NO information that this operating time has reached the level of TESTS - NO !!!

          PS From the "pros" "-" I accept with DEEP RESPECT (I actually don't give a damn about "+" and "-"), but when "-" - comfort DILETANTS - evil takes! Understand first - then pop!
    2. Alex_Rarog
      Alex_Rarog 12 July 2016 08: 47
      0
      Yes, most likely all in one!
    3. chunga-changa
      chunga-changa 12 July 2016 09: 56
      +2
      Quote: Corporal
      Trajectory change, or programmable blasting

      Different goals. For delivering strikes, long-range, high-precision, guided munitions are needed; for self-defense, munitions with controlled detonation are needed. The same in caliber. Large for striking, small for defense. 76-114mm are considered universal.
  2. Altona
    Altona 12 July 2016 06: 43
    +3
    All the same, for the time being this weapon is for less significant purposes, auxiliary to the missiles on board. Both in range and power.
    1. venik
      venik 12 July 2016 08: 44
      +3
      Quote: Altona
      All the same, for the time being this weapon is for less significant purposes, auxiliary to the missiles on board. Both in range and power.


      Actually, the way it is! In the late 50s and 60s, the enthusiasm for missiles reached the point where separate projects appeared (mainly in the USA), completely devoid of artillery (only one missile). However, it quickly passed. It became clear that airborne barrel artillery is still necessary - it significantly increases the versatility of the ship!
  3. kugelblitz
    kugelblitz 12 July 2016 06: 58
    +5
    The railguns so far are only practically disposable, and it doesn’t smell like controllability, in fact, a combat laser is even more real, although despite attempts, the direction turned out to be deadlocked due to strong absorption of energy in the atmosphere.
    And so classic barrel artillery seems to me over time to transform shots into guided active-rocket shells, unless of course they are interrupted by cheap short-range missiles. The task is to create low-cost guidance systems, namely, it will certainly be telecontrol with the brains on the ship, like the SAM Tor, only with a much more powerful computer and a perfect radar.
    1. voyaka uh
      voyaka uh 12 July 2016 10: 19
      +3
      "shots at guided rocket projectiles, if they are
      Do not kill cheap short-range missiles. The challenge is to create
      inexpensive guidance systems "////

      The fact of the matter is that both guided missiles and guided missiles
      very expensive. And guidance systems are not cheap.
      Therefore, they began to work intensively with railguns and lasers: they were looking for a cheap but accurate shot.
    2. The comment was deleted.
    3. Dart2027
      Dart2027 12 July 2016 20: 24
      0
      Quote: kugelblitz
      Unless of course they are killed by cheap short-range missiles

      It is unlikely. A shell is cheaper than a rocket.
      1. venik
        venik 12 July 2016 21: 41
        +1
        Quote: Dart2027
        A shell is cheaper than a rocket.


        Of course cheaper !!! But the CONTROLLED projectile is a "toy" all the same, not cheap!
      2. venik
        venik 12 July 2016 21: 41
        0
        Quote: Dart2027
        A shell is cheaper than a rocket.


        Of course cheaper !!! But the CONTROLLED projectile is a "toy" all the same, not cheap!
  4. Zaurbek
    Zaurbek 12 July 2016 07: 12
    +2
    It is quite possible to experiment with a long-barrel 152 mm gun, a shot of up to 100 km with an active-reactive projectile sounds attractive, especially since the guidance systems already allow us to do this.
    1. Dart2027
      Dart2027 12 July 2016 20: 27
      0
      Quote: Zaurbek
      152mm cannon quite possible, shot up to 100km

      "Coalition" seems to hit 70 km.
      1. Zaurbek
        Zaurbek 14 July 2016 18: 02
        0
        At a marine gun, the trunk is longer, the walls of the trunk are thicker. So the charge can be more powerful.
        1. ProkletyiPirat
          ProkletyiPirat 15 July 2016 15: 06
          0
          moreover, in addition, the barrel is cooled by water ...
  5. venik
    venik 12 July 2016 08: 38
    +2
    Dear Community! I don't understand something, or is there really a non-rotating installation on this "Zamvolte" ???
    1. kotdavin4i
      kotdavin4i 12 July 2016 09: 29
      +1
      Judging by the picture - somehow they rotate ...
    2. kotdavin4i
      kotdavin4i 12 July 2016 09: 32
      0
      there’s even a photo ... somehow they twist this crap ...
    3. Altona
      Altona 12 July 2016 10: 20
      0
      Quote: venik
      Dear Community! I don't understand something or is there really a non-rotating installation on this "Zamvolta"?

      -------------------
      It rotates. Only the shelling sector overlaps its own setting, and you can sandal yourself. Designers so composed the design. They even stuffed the engine in such a way that they did not provide for a repair hatch for excavation. They were taken out through the slot in the board, made by an autogen.
      1. venik
        venik 13 July 2016 08: 43
        -2
        Mother dear !! This iron-shaped trough, in my opinion, is generally a vivid example of "strategic stupidity and sea thoughtlessness" !! (I didn’t come up with it myself - so some state admiral spoke about aircraft carriers).

        PS That's what happens when you struggle to become a trendsetter of marine fashion !!!
      2. venik
        venik 13 July 2016 08: 43
        0
        Mother dear !! This iron-shaped trough, in my opinion, is generally a vivid example of "strategic stupidity and sea thoughtlessness" !! (I didn’t come up with it myself - so some state admiral spoke about aircraft carriers).

        PS That's what happens when you struggle to become a trendsetter of marine fashion !!!
  6. K-50
    K-50 12 July 2016 09: 44
    +7
    Honestly, the article is kind of dull. winked
    For example, when firing from a 127 mm gun, a projectile can reach Mach 3 speed (approximately 2000 knots / 3704 km / h depending on altitude). Although it is half the speed that a projectile can achieve when firing from a rail gun, it is more than two times the speed of a conventional 127 mm projectile.

    1 Mach is 330 m / s, the speed of sound in air.
    Even from a tank gun, the initial velocity of the shot is up to 1600 m / s when firing with a sub-caliber projectile with a divisible pan.
    The muzzle velocity of 130 mm of the AK_130 projectile is 850 m / s, which is not much less than the planned 1000 m / s, but is there something additional to "fence"? Maybe then it is easier to use active-reactive ammunition? winked
  7. Verdun
    Verdun 12 July 2016 11: 58
    +1
    Strange impression of the article. As they say, "a mixture of a bulldog with a rhinoceros" Too many things are dumped in one heap - anti-aircraft and universal artillery systems, railguns and lasers ... , in the case of an increase in the calibers used, it is quite capable of competing with small and medium RCC. At the same time, its obvious advantage is the fact that, alas, it is impossible to protect yourself from the projectile with the help of interference ...
  8. CTPEJIKuH
    CTPEJIKuH 13 July 2016 17: 25
    0
    Quote: venik
    Quote: psiho117
    They tested correctable 35mm shells back in the 80s of the last century, but at that time, the sheepskin was not worth the effort. And in the 57mm caliber, the Americans showed ORCA several years ago ...


    And you can from this place in more detail! Do you have any links? As far as I know, the 35-mm projectile of the development of the 80s had a remote fuse, and not an adjustable trajectory with homing at the target! And as for ORCA, I will also ask for a reference or details !! And then a small misunderstanding comes out - this thing still exists in the form of layouts, and it is intended for shooting at inactive targets!

    Here's what I remembered on the topic of shell adjustment:
    http://pvo.guns.ru/other/italie/otomatic/index.htm
    1. venik
      venik 14 July 2016 15: 14
      0
      Here's what I remembered on the topic of shell adjustment:
      //pvo.guns.ru/other/italie/otomatic/index.htm

      Yes! The article is familiar. But how many did not try to track the fate of the project (I mean the shells) in the future - I did not find ANYTHING! Either "they" have classified them helluva lot, or, as the saying goes, "ANYTHING WAS NOT GOING AGAIN !!"

      As for ORCKA, this little thing was presented at the exhibition somewhere in April last year. in the form of a layout, with the reference that R&D on this topic is ongoing ... Moreover, the projectile (note) is intended EXCLUSIVELY for the fight against small-sized surface targets! Where did the esteemed psiho117 get the information that they have existed for several YEARS — kill God, I don’t know .... (I have been interested in this topic for quite some time)


      1. psiho117
        psiho117 14 July 2016 22: 22
        0
        Quote: venik
        Where is the esteemed psiho117 took information that he had been with them FOR SEVERAL YEARS — kill God, I don’t know

        I didn’t say this - in response to a statement about pre-existing The only one in the world that has no analogues to our 57mm projectile, I wrote that the Americans had previously shown an ORKA projectile, i.e. presented at the exhibition.
        And a year later, a similar development was announced with us. And now, respectively, they are both under development.
        But something tells me that BAE Systems will finish work earlier hi

        Actually, I mean the CORRECTED (i.e. homing) shells !!! Unless of course you carefully read.

        It seems to me that you are seriously mistaken. Adjustable and homing ammunition are different branches of development.
        For example, Javelin has a GOS - he is homing.
        And for example, Cornet - does not have it, and is induced by the command method through the manhole. ray - it is adjustable.
        So, neither the American nor the Russian 57mm announcements are homing, they are adjustable. For their guidance, sighting of the target in the sight is required, and the return of teams to adjust the course. Usually this is done by placing the rocket \ projectile in the correcting target created by the radar or manhole. ray. When you try to leave the target, the computer sends a signal, and the projectile / rocket corrects course.
        This method is widespread, and finally I got to small-caliber artillery - the microelectronic base has fallen so much that the projectile is no longer 30 times more expensive than usual.
        And now, according to sabzh, I won’t give any links to the development, because it was back in the 90s, when I was still young, and I didn’t know the words like that - the Internet. But it was read in a credible source - the journal Foreign Military Review, which was very well oriented in this very military review.

        So, research in this direction was carried out by the Italian company OTO Melara together with the British British Aerospace, and they developed a 76mm adjustable projectile for the promising ZSU Otomatic. More precisely, at first they indulged with 35mm, but the then microelectronic base, although it allowed to put simultaneously correcting charges, an antenna and a command receiver, a charge and a radio fuse, in a 35mm shell, but it was so expensive (and unreliable what to conceal) that the caliber was increased to 40mm, then up to 57mm, and stopped at 76mm - it was with an acceptable cost (only 10 times more expensive), and the reliability of the defeat - 0,45-0,5 for one projectile.
        The projectile had six small corrective charges placed in the hull - by launching the corresponding one, it was possible to change the projectile flight path within 10 ° according to commands from the ground control system. The command receiver was located in the bottom of the projectile, and its antenna on the feathers of the stabilizer.
        As far as I remember, I was guided by the beam of a microwave radar.
        Why this system has remained a prototype - I do not know. Perhaps she was too breakthrough and conservative circles did not accept her, perhaps she lost to the missiles.
        Indeed, at that time only breakthrough military theorists and science fiction thought about the problem of dropping a heap of UAVs, and missiles were enough to destroy manned vehicles. But now, we see the incarnation of this project, but on a modern electronic basis.
        1. venik
          venik 15 July 2016 20: 06
          0
          Reply psiho117
          Well - again, a comment in 2 copies at once got useful! I don't know what to do! Thank God, at least I got through! And you can't delete it - you can only change the text !!! Which is what I'm doing. Now I will drop one more comment - about the "remote blasting" (for which you took up arms against me)!
        2. venik
          venik 15 July 2016 20: 06
          0
          Reply psiho117
          And in the 57mm caliber, the Americans showed the ORCA shell several years ago ... (I quote you !!)
          I didn’t say this - in response to a statement about the already existing Only In The World And None Analogs our 57mm projectile (again I quote you !!)
          I confess, it’s just about the ZSU Otomatic project - I’ve sinned somehow and forgot (a long time ago it was ..) - “got excited.” By the way - the project ended FAILURE - the shells fired “once”, or even “2 times”.

          For small calibers there is only a 57-mm Russian shell (and even that is still in the testing phase). The rest have not yet reached this ... (I quote myself !!).

          Those. Today REALLY there is only a Russian shell for the development of the Tula Design Bureau of Nudelman. Why I believe that he IS - I quote:
          The director of the Central Research Institute "Burevestnik", a member of the Uralvagonzavod concern, Georgy Zakamennykh, said at the KADEX-2016 arms exhibition in Kazakhstan:
          A guided artillery shell (UAS) WAS CREATED on the Tochmash design bureau under the improved Petrel artillery system based on the S-60 gun, created back in the mid-40s.

          TTH:
          Warhead weight - 2 kg
          Explosive weight - 400 gr
          Initial speed - 980 m / s
          Sighting range - 0,2 - 6/8 km (for manned targets) 0,2-3 / 5 (for unmanned)
          The height of the targets hit - up to 4.5 km
          The probability of hitting the target (with transonic speed) with 2 shells is 0,8 (for 1 shell, according to our own estimates - somewhere 05-0.6)
          Guidance Type - Laser Homing
          ANY design engineer can sound such a performance characteristics only AFTER they have been carried out, at least preliminary TESTS !!! For it is known that DESIGN hi-ki are SIGNIFICANTLY different from what REALLY IS OBTAINED "in metal". I KNOW from my own experience!
          By the way, in favor of the assumption that these "products", at least passed the tests, the following quotation of the same Zamenny further indicates:
          Especially for ZAK-57 “Derivation-Air Defense”, a multifunctional projectile with a remote fuse is also being developed, the features of which are NOT DISCLOSED. (Estess, but it’s not in the metal yet! By the way, I think that’s why the ORKCA data is also more correct: Ordnance for Rapid Kill of Attack Craft. There is also R&D going on there. In any case, there is NO test data IT WAS.
          The second topic: shells with "remote detonation." About this - a little later (I-no - "buggy"). God forbid to shove this premise ... If you want, we can exchange “soap” so that we can continue to debate and not “load” the site ...
          1. venik
            venik 15 July 2016 21: 36
            0
            Reply psiho117

            Unfortunately, during the discussion on this topic, a conceptual confusion arose - many authors, under the concept of “guided projectile”, also accepted “remotely detonated” shells, which is why I applied a not quite correct wording:
            Actually, I mean the CORRECTED (i.e. homing) shells !!! Unless of course you carefully read. (I quote myself !!)
            -=
            It seems to me that you are seriously mistaken. Adjustable and homing ammunition are different branches of development. (I quote you !!)
            -=
            Here we are confronted with a conceptual contradiction: for you, the shells / missiles remotely controlled (by the operator) are CORRECTED. But for me (by virtue of the education and experience I received, CORRECTION is a smooth (sometimes monotonous (if you have to deal with higher mathematics - you know what “monotonic function” is) change of parameters (orbits, trajectories, etc.). Therefore, for me call the radio-controlled missile system of the Pechora complex (namely, Pechora, not the Neva), ADJUSTED - THE LANGUAGE DOES NOT TURN (you would see which somersaults it writes out, chasing the goal !!!). Therefore, for me, high-speed are CORRECTED shells, missiles 9M335 / 57E6 ("Armor-S", "C Sleep »,« STANDART-3 "and projectiles having no motor (or just overclocking) and are not able to make sudden evolution of large accelerations (fast kinetic energy of falling). sobirayu not claim that I am right! Just like that used to think!
            1. Glad
              Glad 20 July 2016 17: 55
              +1
              Quote: venik
              It seems to me that you are seriously mistaken. Adjustable and homing ammunition are different branches of development. (I quote you !!)
              -=
              Here we are confronted with a conceptual contradiction: for you, the shells / missiles remotely controlled (by the operator) are CORRECTED. But for me (by virtue of the education and experience I received - CORRECTION is a smooth (sometimes monotonous (if you have to suffer with higher mathematics - you know what “monotonic function” is) change of parameters (orbits, trajectories, etc.) ... Not I’m going to say that I’m right! I’m just so used to counting!


              Fact dear venikthat at the present time the concepts of "adjustable" and "homing" are generally accepted terms, behind which stand a completely definite technical performance, the composition of the equipment placed on the ammunition and, consequently, specific combat capabilities, tactics of use, economic indicators, etc. Respected psiho 117, and told you about it.

              This is to the fact that often disputes arise when different people call equally different things.

              "To name correctly means to understand correctly" (C) There is no place for interpretations like: "for you ..." and "for me ..."
          2. venik
            venik 15 July 2016 21: 36
            0
            Reply psiho117

            A bit about the shells of "remote detonation"
            The first shells with remote (non-contact) detonation appeared at the end of the 19th century (shrapnel shells) !!! Actively used in the 1st World War, and the Civil War. We used the method of temporary “delay” of a non-contact fuse (a powder tube is an analogue of a Bikford cord that ignites at the moment of firing). The accuracy of course was: “+/- one galosh”, but against the infantry hiding in the trenches and trenches - it worked quite effectively, and against the attacking horse lava too! Subsequently, as the troops were saturated with automatic small arms and mortars, the “theme” went into the shadows for a long time!
            Now - he is objecting to a new level (life goes in an upward spiral). I know 3 ways of the method of remote (or rather non-contact detonation:
            1. "time delay", is divided into 2 subspecies:
            • Actually the "time delay" (the oldest and most inaccurate)
            • Projectile revolution counter (this is a new one - much more accurate - but also not “Ah!”

            2. “remote fuse” (usually a laser or radar) that is triggered as it approaches an e-mail or an obstacle (it is widely used in modern MLRS and UR). It was to neutralize the latter that the EW “Mercury” system was created

            3. "radio command detonation" with measuring the distance to the target and the projectile.