Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    Russian Gun Artillery: Discussion Thread

    Share
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16149
    Points : 16780
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Russian Gun Artillery: Discussion Thread

    Post  GarryB on Sat Aug 06, 2016 1:25 pm

    The flaw here is perfectly clear. While there is not room for the 152mm caliber for mortar use, "there has been nothing developed to replace" the "capability" of the 160mm mortar = there is room for the 160mm caliber for mortar use. Pretty contradictory.

    But the 160mm mortar was found to be too heavy for general use and was only found to be useful in mountains... considering the 240mm mortar would also be useful in the mountains and as both would need to be vehicle mounted due to weight of the weapons and the ammo why would you make a new weapon to replace the 160mm weapon?

    I would say it does not make sense to scrap them if they are effective in a niche role, but not replace them either.

    Following your argument, a 152mm gun mortar (like the 120mm gun mortar that you praise) mounted on armata, kurganets or bumerang platforms would not be able even to replace the capabilities of the M-160 towed mortar developed in the 1940s.

    It is not a gun/mortar.

    If you converted the 240mm mortar with a much longer barrel you could make it a gun/mortar but a gun can't be converted into a mortar that way.


    There are guns... which are generally direct fire weapons of high velocity... their advantage is long range... their problem is they normally don't fire much above about 45 degrees and if they do their high velocity means their shells go very high up which means more time for wind and even the earths rotation to reduce accuracy... especially a close range targets. Their flat trajectory also means some targets behind hills or high ground can't be hit.
    Guns generally have a fixed large propellant charge.

    If you think of a very tall building in a city... if you stand behind that a gun can't get you because its flat trajectory means the shell can't come down directly upon you without hitting the building you are standing behind.

    There are also Howitzers, which have shorter barrels, less muzzle velocity, less range... often a heavier shell, and variable propellant that means for close range shots you can reduce the propellant load so the lofted shell does not go up so high and comes down on the target much quicker.

    A gun/mortar is a Howitzer that can fire mortar bombs.... it has variable propellant and can elevate above 45 degrees.

    The 152mm gun of the Coalition is technically a gun/howitzer in that it has variable propellant and high elevation, but it has the long barrel and long range of a gun.

    The M160 fires a 40kg projectile over relatively short distances. Even an in service MSTA with its 152mm gun can fire a 40kg shell much further, but why would they want to spend good money developing a new type of ammo for a vehicle that is already able to exceed this performance?

    The 120mm gun/mortar is a mortar with a longer barrel able to fire mortar bombs and shells to distances close to the range of the 122mm howitzer. By making its barrel longer you get a weapon that can replace both the standard vehicle mounted 120mm mortar and the standard vehicle mounted 122mm gun with one weapon of similar range with ammo that is just as powerful.

    Creating a mortar round for the 152mm guns to fire is like making a 7.62mm pistol bullet that an SVD could fire... A sniper might find a close range weapon useful... but a sub machine gun is much better than adding complication to his primary weapon... I mean how many ammo storage slots in the Coalitions ammo system will you waste with 12km range mortar bombs? You could have 152mm shells that are just as powerful but could hit targets at 70km in those slots...

    How bad must be in your view the armata, kurganets and bumerang platforms for the use in mountains. Or maybe the 8mm matter a lot.

    They will have 240mm mortars for mountain use in reserve... why would you need to waste money developing a capability for the Coalition that it does not need?

    The flaw here is that you even see not the standardization value of going from two calibers (152mm, 160mm) to one (152mm). It asuming your position about the 160mm being still a living caliber, where I do not agree.

    Standardisation only makes sense when one thing can do both jobs. Considering that the 160mm mortar is a very specialised system with very specific uses it does not make sense to adapt the 152mm to do the same role... it is simply not worth the money.

    Like all the ammunition of 120mm is not mortar ammunition, and you call not it two different calibers, to have mortar ammunition of 152mm in adition to other types of ammunition would not mean "creating a new mortar caliber in the 152mm size".

    A mortar bomb is a specific type of ammo. If you want to develop a 152mm mortar round then you have to develop a new mortar bomb.

    The 152mm Coalition already can cut its propellant charge to a different size to alter range... using existing ammo it could simply cut the propellant charge down to a 10th and fire the standard shell to 12km or so if you wanted to I guess, but the Coalition would never operate so close to the frontline that this would be useful.

    The mortar carrier variants of armata and typhoon and boomerang and kurganets on the other hand will be operating supporting infantry so their 120mm gun/mortars will get lots of use.

    I never said it, you was who said that the 2S35 was able to fire in mortar style. I commented that I would expect a new gun for 152mm that combines direct and indirect fire (including mortar style), in the mold of the 120mm gun mortar that you praise (and I also consider successful).

    Coalition is a gun/howitzer... it is not a mortar.

    Again, the flaw here is obvious. One link for you see how the M-160 is from the 1940s and not from the 1960s (the first in the list).

    So that same page clearly shows the 240mm mortar is from one year later and it is still kept in reserve... and I have seen lots of videos of it being used in exercises...

    For these cases I try to form my opinion according to the facts that are public. There are multiple public reports/links about the use of the Russian warfare in Russia and in other places, that can be used in support of the own opinions.

    The facts that are public is that the 160mm mortar is considered an excellent weapon in mountain warfare. Nothing has been adopted that could easily replace it except perhaps the 240mm mortar.

    Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence... just because they don't mention it does not mean it is gone.



    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order
    avatar
    eehnie

    Posts : 1234
    Points : 1259
    Join date : 2015-05-13

    Re: Russian Gun Artillery: Discussion Thread

    Post  eehnie on Sun Aug 07, 2016 9:33 am

    Again I have to say that my opinion is based on facts, and agrees with the public reports.

    In the case of the M-160, there are some evidences of its absence in the Russian active or reserve warfare:

    - The M-160 has been excluded of the lists of Russian active or reserve warfare in good sources like warfare.be.
    - There are not reports about recent use of units of this weapon with origin in the Russian active or reserve warfare, that contradicts the accuracy of the exclusion of this weapon of the lists.

    GarryB wrote:So that same page clearly shows the 240mm mortar is from one year later and it is still kept in reserve... and I have seen lots of videos of it being used in exercises...

    You can link the videos about the towed M-240 to see if they are modern (at least from 2014-5). Ten years ago, the presence of these old weapons was real, but now. after the last decommission wave between 2010 and 2013 approximately that retired even the T-64, there is not evidence of it.

    The source that I linked to see that the M-160 is from the 1940s, is a list of material developed by Russia or used by Russia, but it says nothing about the current presence of a weapon in the Russian active or reserve warfare. This is a very complete source, but sometimes is not very updated (some chapters are without update since 2007-2008).
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16149
    Points : 16780
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Russian Gun Artillery: Discussion Thread

    Post  GarryB on Sun Aug 07, 2016 2:31 pm

    You can link the videos about the towed M-240 to see if they are modern (at least from 2014-5). Ten years ago, the presence of these old weapons was real, but now. after the last decommission wave between 2010 and 2013 approximately that retired even the T-64, there is not evidence of it.

    I doubt they would continue to keep the towed 240mm mortars in reserve.

    The 2S4 on the other hand is reportedly being kept in reserve for future potential use.

    They have developed guided shells which would make it a very potent weapon for very specific roles.

    Regarding the M160 absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

    They did not build a huge number of weapons in the first place and it was never intended to be a standard weapon used everywhere.


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order
    avatar
    eehnie

    Posts : 1234
    Points : 1259
    Join date : 2015-05-13

    Re: Russian Gun Artillery: Discussion Thread

    Post  eehnie on Sun Aug 07, 2016 3:49 pm

    The exclusion of the M-160 of the lists of good sources is not absence of evidence. It is active evidence against its presence in the Russian active or reserve warfare.
    avatar
    George1

    Posts : 10042
    Points : 10532
    Join date : 2011-12-22
    Location : Greece

    Re: Russian Gun Artillery: Discussion Thread

    Post  George1 on Thu Sep 01, 2016 10:41 pm

    120mm self-propelled artillery gun "Phlox"





       State Secretary, Deputy General Director of JSC "Scientific and Production Corporation" Uralvagonzavod "Alex Zharich on his page on www.facebook.com posted photos of a new 120-mm self-propelled artillery" Phlox "developed by JSC" Central Research Institute "Petrel " (Nizhny Novgorod). SAO sample "Phlox" will be shown for the first time at the opening exhibition "Army 2016".

       120-mm automatic cannon "Phlox" performed in an armored wheeled chassis "Ural-BB" (6x6). On the roof of the armored cab is remotely controlled weapon module with 12.7-mm machine gun "Kord". Protection against guided weapons system provides a laser detection and jamming.

    http://bmpd.livejournal.com/2098175.html


    _________________
    "There's no smoke without fire.", Georgy Zhukov

    avatar
    eehnie

    Posts : 1234
    Points : 1259
    Join date : 2015-05-13

    Re: Russian Gun Artillery: Discussion Thread

    Post  eehnie on Fri Sep 02, 2016 1:58 am

    It seems very interesting to export.

    For Russia I like more the 2S36 Zauralets-D.
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16149
    Points : 16780
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Russian Gun Artillery: Discussion Thread

    Post  GarryB on Fri Sep 02, 2016 11:00 am

    Actually I quite like this new vehicle.

    It seems to have a gun mount with ammo, whereas the Tigr with a 122mm gun on its back looks external and needing an external human loader.

    The lack of a muzzle brake on this system and the fact that they are clearly using a 120mm gun/mortar makes it more interesting...

    This further suggests 122mm towed and self propelled guns might be getting withdrawn from active service in favour of 120mm gun/mortars.

    That would make sense as the new 120mm gun mortars could replace existing 120mm mortars and 122mm guns both towed and self propelled.

    This would eliminate one calibre from the front line ammo supply chain, yet with a longer barrel 120mm weapon you wont lose much in terms of range performance.


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order
    avatar
    eehnie

    Posts : 1234
    Points : 1259
    Join date : 2015-05-13

    Re: Russian Gun Artillery: Discussion Thread

    Post  eehnie on Fri Sep 30, 2016 4:16 pm

    GarryB wrote:Actually I quite like this new vehicle.

    It seems to have a gun mount with ammo, whereas the Tigr with a 122mm gun on its back looks external and needing an external human loader.

    The lack of a muzzle brake on this system and the fact that they are clearly using a 120mm gun/mortar makes it more interesting...

    This further suggests 122mm towed and self propelled guns might be getting withdrawn from active service in favour of 120mm gun/mortars.

    That would make sense as the new 120mm gun mortars could replace existing 120mm mortars and 122mm guns both towed and self propelled.

    This would eliminate one calibre from the front line ammo supply chain, yet with a longer barrel 120mm weapon you wont lose much in terms of range performance.

    The 2S1 is a weapon that remains actual and very useful. Russia has the 2S34 if want to replace the 122mm caliber, at the rithm they want to do it. Of course Russia will not eliminate the 122mm until its stored ammunition of this caliber is finished.

    I do not think this new vehicle would have advantage over the 2S34.

    With the 2S34 and the 2S36, for me this new vehicle can be a model for export.
    avatar
    Benya

    Posts : 416
    Points : 420
    Join date : 2016-06-05
    Location : Budapest, Hungary

    Re: Russian Gun Artillery: Discussion Thread

    Post  Benya on Fri Sep 30, 2016 11:06 pm

    Some technical info about the "Floks"


    Phlox Floks 120mm wheeled self-propelled howitzer / mortar carrier



    • Description

    The Phlox (Floks) is 120mm wheeled self-propelled howitzer / mortar carrier developed and designed by the Russian JSC Central Research Institute Burevestnik, a subdivision of UralVagonZavod. The Phlox was unveiled during Army 2016, the International Military Technical Forum which was hedl near Moscow (Russia) from the 6 to 11 September, 2016. The Phlox is an artillery system which combines the capacities to be used as mortar and howitzer. This artillery system is designed to conduct firing missions against stationary and moving targets by mortar shells and high-precision projectiles. It can be used for direct and indirect fire. According to a contract signed with the Russian MoD (Ministry of Defense), the company is to conduct the trials of the 120mm Flox SPG before September 2018. This new vehicle is marketed by Uralvagonzavod to response on new request of international military market and for the Russian armed forces.


    • Technical Data

    -Armament

    The main armament of the Phlox artillery system consists of one 120mm mortar/howitzer which can fires mortar bombs or artillery shells. It can fire a full range of ammunition as HE (High Explosive) projectile, guided projectile and HE mortar rounds. With mortar ammunition, the Phlox has a maximum range of 7.5 km and 13 km with artillery shells. The main armament is mounted at the rear of a truck chassis with an elevation from -5° to 80° and a traverse of around 35°. The gun has a rate of fire from 8 to 10 projectiles per minute. On the top of the crew cab is mounted a remotely operated weapon station which can be armed with a 7.62mm or one 12.7mm machine gun. A bank of four smoke grenade dischargers is mounted on each side of the crew cab roof. The Phlox vehicle carries at total of 80 ammunition, with 28 rounds ready to use. In firing position, the 120mm mortar/cannon is loaded manually by two operators located at the rear of the truck.

    -Design and protection

    The 120mm Phlox artillery system is based on a 6x6 truck chassis with a crew cab a the front and the 120mm artillery weapon at the rear. It has a crew of four including driver, commander and two operators. The crew cab is protected against firing of small arms and shell splinters. There is two single doors on each side of the crew cabin fitted with bulletproof windows with firing port in the center. The truck carries a total of 80 ammunition, with 16 rounds stored in a box located at the right side of the truck chassis, the remaining ammunition are located in a small shelter located at the rear of the crew cab.

    -Mobility

    The 120mm Phlox artillery system is based on a modified 6x6 cross-country truck chassis Ural-4320. This truck is motorized with a turbocharged diesel engine, developing 300 hp. coupled to a five-speed gearbox. The truck can run at a maximum speed of 75 km/h with a maximum cruising range of 1,000 km.

    -Accessories

    The 120mm Phlox artillery system is fitted with a a Shtora-like electro-optical jammer that disrupts antitank guided missiles, laser rangefinders and target designators. The Phlox is also fitted with an autonomous power supply unit to operate the main armament when the main engine is out of work. Standard accessories of the vehicle includes a central tyre inflation system, NBC protection system, heating and navigation and orientation system. The crew cabin is also fitted with computerized firing control system.


    • Specifications

    Armament:
    One 120mm mortar/cannon and one remotely operated weapon station armed with a 7.62mm or 12.7mm machine gun

    Country users:
    -

    Designer Country:
    Russia

    Accessories:
    Jammer system, power supply, central tyre inflation system, NC protection ystem, heating, navigation system,fire control system,

    Crew:
    4

    Armor:
    Protection against firing of small arms and shell splinters

    Weight:
    20,000 kg

    Speed truck:
    75 km/h

    Range truck:
    1,000 km

    Dimensions:
    Length: ? m; Width: ? m; Height: ? m







    Source: Arrow http://www.armyrecognition.com/russia_russian_army_vehicles_system_artillery_uk/phlox_flox_120mm_self-propelled_howitzer_mortar_carrier_technical_data_sheet_specifications_pictures_video_12409163.html



    1,000 kms range? Isn't that too much? Ammo capacity is good, even better is an/some ammo carrier truck(s) supports the "Floks" system or a battery of 6 systems.
    avatar
    eehnie

    Posts : 1234
    Points : 1259
    Join date : 2015-05-13

    Re: Russian Gun Artillery: Discussion Thread

    Post  eehnie on Sat Oct 01, 2016 1:34 am


    It is very interesting data.

    The fact that the crew is out, unprotected while firing, makes this new system some step back the 2S1, 2S34, 2S36, and even of the 2S23 and 2S9, on safety of the crew. It makes unlikely the adoption of this system by the Russian Armed Forces. I do not think it would meet the current Russian requirements on safety of the crew.

    Otherwise this system would be far ahead of towed artillery.

    avatar
    George1

    Posts : 10042
    Points : 10532
    Join date : 2011-12-22
    Location : Greece

    Re: Russian Gun Artillery: Discussion Thread

    Post  George1 on Sat Oct 01, 2016 2:03 am

    It looks too ugly..


    _________________
    "There's no smoke without fire.", Georgy Zhukov

    avatar
    eehnie

    Posts : 1234
    Points : 1259
    Join date : 2015-05-13

    Re: Russian Gun Artillery: Discussion Thread

    Post  eehnie on Sat Oct 01, 2016 2:36 am

    The analysis of the data offered by the Military Balance 2016 for Russia, has one of its weakest points in the data refered to a number of old towed artillery systems that are not in active service.

    It is definitely proved by the fact of an interesting coincidence.

    According to the following link, published in february of 2008, armyrecognition.com offers the same data for many systems than The Military Balance 2016:

    http://armyrecognition.com/russie/russie_armee_russe_forces_terrestres_equipements_militaires_vehicules_blindes_information_descriptio.html#artillery

    Canon- obusier tracté
    D-44 85mm ?
    D-30 122mm (Tracté) 4,600 (active)
    D-74 122mm (Tracté) ?
    M-30 M-1938 122mm (Tracté) 3,750 https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/122-%D0%BC%D0%BC_%D0%B3%D0%B0%D1%83%D0%B1%D0%B8%D1%86%D0%B0_%D0%BE%D0%B1%D1%80%D0%B0%D0%B7%D1%86%D0%B0_1938_%D0%B3%D0%BE%D0%B4%D0%B0_(%D0%9C-30)#.D0.9D.D0.B0_.D0.B2.D0.BE.D0.BE.D1.80.D1.83.D0.B6.D0.B5.D0.BD.D0.B8.D0.B8
    M-46 130mm (Tracté) 650 https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/130-%D0%BC%D0%BC_%D0%BF%D1%83%D1%88%D0%BA%D0%B0_%D0%9C-46#.D0.9D.D0.B0_.D0.B2.D0.BE.D0.BE.D1.80.D1.83.D0.B6.D0.B5.D0.BD.D0.B8.D0.B8
    2A36 152mm (Tracté) 1,100 (active)
    2A65 152mm (Tracté) 750 (active)
    D-1 152mm ? (see M-1943, is the same)
    D-20 152mm (Tracté) 1,075 https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/152-%D0%BC%D0%BC_%D0%BF%D1%83%D1%88%D0%BA%D0%B0-%D0%B3%D0%B0%D1%83%D0%B1%D0%B8%D1%86%D0%B0_%D0%94-20#.D0.AD.D0.BA.D1.81.D0.BF.D0.BB.D1.83.D0.B0.D1.82.D0.B0.D0.BD.D1.82.D1.8B
    M-1943 152mm (Tracté) 700 https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/152-%D0%BC%D0%BC_%D0%B3%D0%B0%D1%83%D0%B1%D0%B8%D1%86%D0%B0_%D0%BE%D0%B1%D1%80%D0%B0%D0%B7%D1%86%D0%B0_1943_%D0%B3%D0%BE%D0%B4%D0%B0_(%D0%94-1)#.D0.9D.D0.B0_.D0.B2.D0.BE.D0.BE.D1.80.D1.83.D0.B6.D0.B5.D0.BD.D0.B8.D0.B8
    ML-20 M-1937 152mm (Tracté) 100 https://ru.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=152-%D0%BC%D0%BC_%D0%B3%D0%B0%D1%83%D0%B1%D0%B8%D1%86%D0%B0-%D0%BF%D1%83%D1%88%D0%BA%D0%B0_%D0%BE%D0%B1%D1%80%D0%B0%D0%B7%D1%86%D0%B0_1937_%D0%B3%D0%BE%D0%B4%D0%B0_(%D0%9C%D0%9B-20)&stable=0&redirect=no
    B-4M 203mm (Tracté) 40 https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/203-%D0%BC%D0%BC_%D0%B3%D0%B0%D1%83%D0%B1%D0%B8%D1%86%D0%B0_%D0%91-4%D0%9C#.D0.9D.D0.B0_.D0.B2.D0.BE.D0.BE.D1.80.D1.83.D0.B6.D0.B5.D0.BD.D0.B8.D0.B8

    Mortier
    2B16 Nona-K 120mm ? (active)
    2S9 Nona-S 120mm ? (self propelled active)
    2S12 120mm 920 (active)
    PM-38 120mm 900
    M-160 300mm 300 https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/160-%D0%BC%D0%BC_%D0%B4%D0%B8%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B7%D0%B8%D0%BE%D0%BD%D0%BD%D1%8B%D0%B9_%D0%BC%D0%B8%D0%BD%D0%BE%D0%BC%D1%91%D1%82_%D0%BE%D0%B1%D1%80%D0%B0%D0%B7%D1%86%D0%B0_1949_%D0%B3%D0%BE%D0%B4%D0%B0_(%D0%9C-160)#.D0.9E.D0.BF.D0.B5.D1.80.D0.B0.D1.82.D0.BE.D1.80.D1.8B
    2S4 240mm self-propelled mortar 430 (self propelled active)

    After the data of armirecognition.com of 2008 is included the link to the Russian wikipedia, where it is possible to see in the part of the operators, the data offered by The Military Balance 2016.

    I do not know who is the primary source. I would not rule out to be The Military Balance (it is easy to see in their reports of the 2008 or 2007), but it would mean they have been providing the same data for these systems for almost 10 years without updates, and with an strong decommission wave between 2010 and 2013. These systems are from the 1930s, 1940s and 1950s. This is the weakest part of their data.


    Last edited by eehnie on Sun Oct 09, 2016 12:08 am; edited 3 times in total
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16149
    Points : 16780
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Russian Gun Artillery: Discussion Thread

    Post  GarryB on Sat Oct 01, 2016 9:25 am


    The 2S1 is a weapon that remains actual and very useful. Russia has the 2S34 if want to replace the 122mm caliber, at the rithm they want to do it. Of course Russia will not eliminate the 122mm until its stored ammunition of this caliber is finished.

    Don't get me wrong... the 122mm gun in both towed and self propelled versions is a potent and effective weapon, but with the improvements in the 152mm ammo in terms of range and accuracy and the fact that most of the new vehicle families will have gun/mortar vehicles in 120mm calibre and also likely 152mm artillery pieces then the 122mm gun becomes a little redundant.

    The 122mm calibre weapons are rather popular in many foreign countries where the 152mm calibre is too big and too heavy and not really justified... I am sure in 4-5 years time Russia will export its remaining D-30 towed 122mm guns and its remaining 2S1 vehicles that retain 122mm guns and of course they will need ammo and an ammo supply.

    Low rate production can continue in Russia to supply those needs for decades to come.

    In the Russian military however the quicker they can eliminate the calibre of 122mm artillery shells the fewer types of ammo they need to store and supply. The 120mm calibre in shells and mortar rounds can continue to provide excellent short range support.

    The removal of T-62s and T-54/55 tanks and their towed equivalent tank calibre guns means 100mm rifled tank rounds and 115mm smoothbore tank calibre rounds could have already been removed too.

    I do not think this new vehicle would have advantage over the 2S34.

    In a kurganets brigade the 2S34 would be under armoured... a kurganets based 120mm gun mortar vehicle will likely be developed.

    {edit} now I read the new gun/mortar shown has crew outside of the vehicle loading and firing the weapon... such exposed positions for crew and ammo goes against all the protection measures being introduced on the new vehicle families... ie autoloading weapons with unmanned turrets and auto ammo feed systems that separate the crew from the ammo and keep the crew under armour protection.

    This new vehicle would be a huge step back even for the old 2S34 upgraded model.

    In Boomerang and Typhoon brigades this vehicle... if it uses standard components of those families would be excellent in terms of mobility... in comparison a tracked 2S34 would not keep up with a wheeled family of vehicles. But in terms of crew protection the 2S34 would be better.

    This makes me think there will be 120mm gun armed Armata and Kurganets and Boomerang and Typhoon vehicles... the latter two will be wheeled and high mobility vehicles, while the former two will be better armoured and tracked offering better cross country performance... but all will have unmanned turrets and better armour protection than this truck.

    With the 2S34 and the 2S36, for me this new vehicle can be a model for export.

    Not sure what you mean by 2S36... do you mean Coalition? 2S35?

    2S34 is a stopgap... it exists because there are plenty of chassis and plenty of stores and support equipment for those platforms.

    When the vehicle families get into full production... ie Armata, typhoon, Kurganets, Boomerang, and BMD-4M then 120mm gun/mortar versions of those will replace the 2S34 and upgraded MSTA.

    When new models are available all the surplus items will likely go into storage first and then be exported to allies.

    1,000 kms range? Isn't that too much? Ammo capacity is good, even better is an/some ammo carrier truck(s) supports the "Floks" system or a battery of 6 systems.

    Driving range of the truck. not range of the gun.


    It is very interesting data.

    The fact that the crew is out, unprotected while firing, makes this new system some step back the 2S1, 2S34, 2S36, and even of the 2S23 and 2S9, on safety of the crew. It makes unlikely the adoption of this system by the Russian Armed Forces. I do not think it would meet the current Russian requirements on safety of the crew.

    Otherwise this system would be far ahead of towed artillery.

    I agree... this is for export for replacing 122mm D-30 guns.

    the Typhoon and Boomerang and Kurganets and Armata versions with a 120mm gun/mortar will have auto loading and separation of gun and ammo and the crew.

    The BMD-4M version is called Vena and it has a manned turret but I suspect when unmanned turrets are developed for the other vehicle families that the BMD-4 will get an unmanned turret version too.

    M-160 300mm 300 https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/160-%D0%BC%D0%BC_%D0%B4%D0%B8%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B7%D0%B8%D0%BE%D0%BD%D0%BD%D1%8B%D0%B9_%D0%BC%D0%B8%D0%BD%D0%BE%D0%BC%D1%91%D1%82_%D0%BE%D0%B1%D1%80%D0%B0%D0%B7%D1%86%D0%B0_1949_%D0%B3%D0%BE%D0%B4%D0%B0_(%D0%9C-160)#.D0.9E.D0.BF.D0.B5.D1.80.D0.B0.D1.82.D0.BE.D1.80.D1.8B

    Typo? The M-160 is a 160mm weapon... not a 300mm weapon.


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order
    avatar
    Benya

    Posts : 416
    Points : 420
    Join date : 2016-06-05
    Location : Budapest, Hungary

    Re: Russian Gun Artillery: Discussion Thread

    Post  Benya on Sat Oct 01, 2016 9:43 am

    GarryB wrote:Driving range of the truck. not range of the gun.

    I know, since there is no 120 mm gun-launched cruise missile Laughing


    Last edited by Benya on Sat Oct 01, 2016 10:50 am; edited 1 time in total
    avatar
    eehnie

    Posts : 1234
    Points : 1259
    Join date : 2015-05-13

    Re: Russian Gun Artillery: Discussion Thread

    Post  eehnie on Sat Oct 01, 2016 10:16 am

    2S36 is being the notation used for the BMD-4M based Zauralets-D artillery system.

    Yes, 300mm for the M-160 is a mistake in the source of origin of the data.

    I do not think all the types of ammunition of 122mm would be available for export. Some maybe, but the most advanced maybe for own use only. They will not be wasted unnecessarily, and to use them Russia needs a number of 2S1, when required. I tend to think that the 2S1 (and as consequence the 122mm caliber) can remain in service with Russia between 10 and 20 years. Maybe more.

    The first replacement in the Russian armed forces will be likely the replacement of the low numbers still active of towed artillery. This even can be done before the procurement of new units of artillery systems based on the new platforms (except the 2S35), with the stored units of self propelled vehicles. Likely this decade.

    Later I tend to think that the less strong systems would be the 2S9 and 2S23, and it can make them the first systems replaced. Surely in the next decade.
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16149
    Points : 16780
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Russian Gun Artillery: Discussion Thread

    Post  GarryB on Sun Oct 02, 2016 8:40 am

    2S36 is being the notation used for the BMD-4M based Zauralets-D artillery system.

    Ahh... that makes sense.

    I suspect that vehicle will also have the same flaw in that the gun is still external and would need crew outside the vehicle to load the weapon...


    I do not think all the types of ammunition of 122mm would be available for export. Some maybe, but the most advanced maybe for own use only. They will not be wasted unnecessarily, and to use them Russia needs a number of 2S1, when required. I tend to think that the 2S1 (and as consequence the 122mm caliber) can remain in service with Russia between 10 and 20 years. Maybe more.

    I agree that the 122mm ammo and weapons would remain effective for the next 20-30 years in the artillery role, but I suspect the real problem is that they have three calibres that are very similar in terms of range and shell weight and performance... there is the 122mm artillery round, the 120mm gun/mortar which has a similar weight shell that while lacks the range in the mortar role (7km or so with standard rounds) is quite competitive with shells (13km or so), and of course the tank calibre of the 125mm smoothbore. I would also add that the 100mm gun of the BMP-3 is also in the same category in terms of range and shell weight.

    The 120mm gun mortar could offer similar performance replacing both the 122mm and 100mm calibres in a support vehicle... whether it is a mortar carrier or a BMP-T fire support vehicle.

    The 122mm will remain effective for some time but its performance can be provided by the 120mm gun/mortar... I would say for air borne units that 2S31 Vena would be better than Zauralets or this new vehicle... the main advantage of the latter two would be lower cost and simplicity and wheeled chassis, but Vena on a Typhoon or Boomerang chassis would also have the advantages of a wheeled chassis in terms of mobility and speed on a road.


    The first replacement in the Russian armed forces will be likely the replacement of the low numbers still active of towed artillery. This even can be done before the procurement of new units of artillery systems based on the new platforms (except the 2S35), with the stored units of self propelled vehicles. Likely this decade.

    I don't agree.

    I think they certainly will replace the very old types of odd calibres if they have not withdrawn them already, but quite often units have towed guns because towed guns are more suitable for their sort of missions. In this case a towed gun unit using 122mm D-30s wont have 2S1 vehicles with 122mm or 2S34 vehicles with 120mm gun/mortars replacing them. More likely they would have NONA towed 120mm gun/mortars replacing their D-30s... because towed guns suit their operation. or mobility requirements.





    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order
    avatar
    Benya

    Posts : 416
    Points : 420
    Join date : 2016-06-05
    Location : Budapest, Hungary

    Re: Russian Gun Artillery: Discussion Thread

    Post  Benya on Tue Oct 04, 2016 11:54 pm

    Nice thumbsup (however, there is a Msta in the first picture, not a Koalitsiya)  


    Russian artillery vehicles 2S35 and 2S19 to be equipped with communication systems for Arctic.

    Russian armor, including latest modifications of 2S35 Coalition-SV and 2S19 MSTA-S self-propelled artillery guns will be equipped with advanced communications means capable of operating in the Arctic, said Director General of the Popov Gorkosvky Communications Equipment enterprise which produces the device Mikhail Gusev.


    Russian artillery 152mm self-propelled howitzer 2S35 Coalition-SV (Picture copyright Vitaly Kuzmin)

    The enterprise is currently engaged in fulfilling the state defense order to equip Russian armor, including the latest one, with advanced communication complexes. "We have already reequipped and continue to equip the existing hardware: howitzers Coalition, Msta, Gvozdika, Tulip, Acacia, as well as the latest 2S35 Coalition-SV, 2S19 MSTA-S and BMD-4 with modern communication means. They are capable of operating at temperatures from minus 50 to plus 50 degrees also in conditions of the Arctic," he said.

    Gusev stressed that the new communication complex is a fully domestic design of the Nizhny Novgorod enterprise which specializes in the production of such devices. "From the point of view of import replacement the unit is fully produced from made-in-Russia components. As for today its functional capabilities cover all the needs of mentioned arms of troops," he said.

    The complex consists of a radio station and internal communications and commutation system which receives outside signal, topographic data and other necessary information for the crew during combat and allows them to communicate between themselves.

    "The new design is distinguished by high functionality, reliability (service life of up to 25 years), minimal size and convenient interface. A tankee can connect with the radio station, field telephone and communicate with all crewmembers with one touch of a hand even in gloves," Gusev said adding the equipment was produced upon demand of domestic armor designers. He said his company production was worth 1 billion rubles last year of which 90 percent were state defense orders. This year the state defense order grew 25 percent.


    Russian 2S19 MSTA-S 152mm self-propelled howitzer at RAE 2015, Russian Arms Expo in Nizhny Tagil, Russia.

    Source: Arrow http://www.armyrecognition.com/october_2016_global_defense_security_news_industry/russian_artillery_vehicles_2s35_and_2s19_to_be_equipped_with_communication_systems_for_arctic_10210161.html



    It is nice to see more arctic variants of more and more vehicles thumbsup . Russia currently has two arctic brigades, the 80th (stationed at Alakurtti, Karelia) and the 200th (stationed at Pechenga, Murmansk region) Detached Motor Rifle Brigades, with a third being formed, and these brigades will surely to be equipped with these state of the art equipment, including arctic Msta and Koalitsiya howitzers.
    avatar
    eehnie

    Posts : 1234
    Points : 1259
    Join date : 2015-05-13

    Re: Russian Gun Artillery: Discussion Thread

    Post  eehnie on Wed Oct 05, 2016 2:32 am

    I do not expect the 2S36 Zauralets-D based on the BMD-4M needs load of the weapon from outside.

    http://www.armyrecognition.com/february_2016_global_defense_security_news_industry/tsniitochmash_has_tested_its_new_fighting_module_for_zauralets-d_self-propelled_artillery_system_tass_10502166.html

    There are not 2B16 Nona-K in the reserve, and the production finished in 1989.
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16149
    Points : 16780
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Russian Gun Artillery: Discussion Thread

    Post  GarryB on Wed Oct 05, 2016 9:54 am

    I do not expect the 2S36 Zauralets-D based on the BMD-4M needs load of the weapon from outside.

    Ooops... my mistake... I was thinking of that wheeled tigr vehicle with a 122mm gun attached to the rear in an external mount. :rolleye:


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order

    Mindstorm

    Posts : 769
    Points : 950
    Join date : 2011-07-20

    Re: Russian Gun Artillery: Discussion Thread

    Post  Mindstorm on Wed Oct 05, 2016 10:03 am

    eehnie wrote:I do not expect the 2S36 Zauralets-D based on the BMD-4M needs load of the weapon from outside

    Please can you point out from where this information come from ?
    avatar
    eehnie

    Posts : 1234
    Points : 1259
    Join date : 2015-05-13

    Re: Russian Gun Artillery: Discussion Thread

    Post  eehnie on Wed Oct 05, 2016 10:14 am

    Mindstorm wrote:
    eehnie wrote:I do not expect the 2S36 Zauralets-D based on the BMD-4M needs load of the weapon from outside

    Please can you point out from where this information come from ?


    GarryB wrote:
    eehnie wrote:2S36 is being the notation used for the BMD-4M based Zauralets-D artillery system.

    Ahh... that makes sense.

    I suspect that vehicle will also have the same flaw in that the gun is still external and would need crew outside the vehicle to load the weapon...
    avatar
    franco

    Posts : 2287
    Points : 2325
    Join date : 2010-08-18

    Re: Russian Gun Artillery: Discussion Thread

    Post  franco on Mon Oct 17, 2016 10:18 pm

    New ammunition with remote detonation

       Group "Tehmash" has started testing new artillery ammunition with remote detonation intelligent system, "Interfax", the press service of the concern.
       "At the first stage of our ammunition will get 57mm combat units AU-220M" Baikal ", which is already included in the armament of armored personnel carriers" Boomerang "and infantry fighting vehicles based on the platform" Armata "T-15 and BMP family" kurganets-25 " . in the future we plan to develop the ammunition caliber 30 mm for older BTR-82, BMP-2 and BMP-3 "- quoted the press service of" Tehmash "Yury Nabokov, Director General of JSC NPO" instrument "on the basis of which was developed shell.
       The press service noted that the main innovation in the projectile will be the presence of a miniature fuse with artificial intelligence. This system allows you to program the shell to undermine a certain time.
       "This time is automatically calculated by the computer, depending on the distance to a target approaching the target, ammo explodes and creates a cloud of several thousand shrapnel balls, which is able to destroy the small-sized UAV, or, for example, reconnaissance quadrocopter." - Quoted the press service of the General Director the Group "Tehmash" Sergey Rusakov
       According to Oleg Chizhevskogo, general designer of NPO "Pribor", shells already passed the stage of development work and took to the preliminary tests.
       "Given the prospect of this development, we expect that in the near future, after the completion of all the tests, it will be put into service" - said O.Chizhevsky.

    More info: http://bmpd.livejournal.com/2188654.html
    avatar
    eehnie

    Posts : 1234
    Points : 1259
    Join date : 2015-05-13

    Re: Russian Gun Artillery: Discussion Thread

    Post  eehnie on Tue Oct 18, 2016 1:49 am

    franco wrote:SP Artillery Numbers
    - includes Ground Forces, Naval Infantry and Coastal plus Airborne
    - normal battalion has 18 firing pieces, rounded up to 20 to allow unit spares
    - does not include training, reserve or storage pieces

    2S1 - 340 (17 bns)
    2S3 - 840 (42 bns)
    2S4 - 8 (1 bn)
    2S5 - 140 (7 bns)
    2S7 - 12 (1 bn)
    2S9 - 370 (16 bns + 7 btys)
    2S19 - 600 (30 bns) last production received in 2014
    2S23 - ~50 not sure if used as a bn mortar bty
    2S34 - ~50 not sure if used as a bn mortar bty or replacing 2S1 bns
    2S35 - 12 delivered this year, main production starts next year
    A-222 - ~30 Berg 130mm Coastal Artillery, status not sure

    Rocket Artillery Numbers
    - broke down by caliber to include all types

    122 - 980 (49 bns) at least 8-10 bns have upgraded Tornado-G
    220 - ~200 ( 4 units of 24 and 8 units of 8 Uragan = 160 plus 5-15 units of 3 TOS-1A)
    300 - 24 (2 brigades of 12 each)

    SP Antitank Numbers
    - part of the Artillery & Rocket Forces
    - organized into companies of 9, rounded up to 10 to allow spares

    BTR-RD - 120 (12 coys) AT-4/5
    9P148 - 200 (20 coys) AT-5
    9P149 - 960 (96 coys) AT-6
    9P157 - ~50 (started production replacing the 9P149) AT-15
    Tigr/Kornet - ~10 (just delivered, starting production) AT-14
    2S25 - ~30 delivered, awaiting upgrading before resuming production

    Towed Artillery

    2A18 D-30 122mm field howitzer - 120 (bn of 12 for 4 abn div = 48 plus bty of 6 for 4 abn bde = 24 plus bty of 6 for 8 spetz bde = 48)
    Nona-K 120mm gun/mortar - ~30 (maybe used in place of D-30's in some Spetz bdes)
    MT-12 Rapira 100mm gun - 270 (bty of 6 for 35 MR bdes plus bty of 6 for 10 arty bdes)
    2A36 152mm field gun - 100-120 (5-6 bn of 18 in 18th MG div (2) and Coastal Artillery bdes)
    2A65 152mm field howitzer - 160-200 (8-10 bn of 18 in Artillery bdes)

    Notes - you would expect the 100mm MT-12 AT gun to be obsolete for destroying tanks but the Russian artillery keeps it as an artillery "sniper" weapon

    Very interesting data to remember, posted by Franco more than 1 year ago (in the page 2 of this topic). In this quote I unified the data of two posts.

    It would be very interesting some update to confirm the trends of the last years and to see new trends.
    avatar
    George1

    Posts : 10042
    Points : 10532
    Join date : 2011-12-22
    Location : Greece

    Re: Russian Gun Artillery: Discussion Thread

    Post  George1 on Mon Nov 07, 2016 9:35 pm

    Report from the artillery factory № 9

    Rare video footage of one of the key enterprises of the Russian military-industrial complex - JSC "Zavod № 9" (Ekaterinburg, in the Soviet period was a "special production" "Uralmash", and now is a part of JSC "Scientific and Production Corporation" Uralvagonzavod "name F . Dzerzhinsky ")



    http://bmpd.livejournal.com/2235448.html


    _________________
    "There's no smoke without fire.", Georgy Zhukov

    avatar
    eehnie

    Posts : 1234
    Points : 1259
    Join date : 2015-05-13

    Re: Russian Gun Artillery: Discussion Thread

    Post  eehnie on Thu Nov 17, 2016 10:40 am

    Some reports say that the Border Service of the FSB has some units of 2S1 (12 units) and D-30 (20 units) both of 122mm.

    I tend to think that these weapons are over what would be necessary in the security forces. In overall terms the 122mm caliber is something that in my view should be used exclusively by the Russian Armed Forces. To be in non-military forces seems a downgrade of this warfare to me, and makes more difficult the standardization. The trend that I would expect (if has not been done at this point) for this caliber and these weapons is to be out of the Russian security forces. In the case of the 2S1 a transfer to the Russian Armed Forces. In the case of the D-30 can also go as aid to third contries.

    Also is reported the presence of some 2S9 (18 units). While I'm not sure if the Russian security forces would need really self propelled artillery, in case of real need this would be the right weapon and the right caliber to have (in my opinion). They have also bigger amounts of other 120mm mortars of portable/man-portable size like the 2S12.

    Sponsored content

    Re: Russian Gun Artillery: Discussion Thread

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Thu Jul 20, 2017 8:31 pm