Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    Russian Gun Artillery: Discussion Thread

    Share

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15465
    Points : 16172
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Russian Gun Artillery: Discussion Thread

    Post  GarryB on Wed Jan 06, 2016 9:43 am

    The 2A65 is the towed version of the MSTA... rather than buying M777 I would prefer to see a towed version of Coalition...

    Besides there is always Grad/Tornado...


    _________________
    “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

    Militarov
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 4812
    Points : 4859
    Join date : 2015-09-02
    Location : Serbia

    Re: Russian Gun Artillery: Discussion Thread

    Post  Militarov on Wed Jan 06, 2016 12:12 pm

    GarryB wrote:The 2A65 is the towed version of the MSTA... rather than buying M777 I would prefer to see a towed version of Coalition...

    Besides there is always Grad/Tornado...

    Towed coalition would be probably 6+ tons, that is not light howtizer by any means. What is goal here is to have 152mm howtizer weighting under 4,5 tons so Mi17 can slung it externally.

    Militarov
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 4812
    Points : 4859
    Join date : 2015-09-02
    Location : Serbia

    Re: Russian Gun Artillery: Discussion Thread

    Post  Militarov on Wed Jan 06, 2016 12:15 pm

    George1 wrote:btw which is the main towed-gun of Russian Army??

    Most numerous is D30 howtizer, then comes MSTA-B, then Giatsint-B. I did not count Rapiras here, as they are specific platform, but their numbers would fit somewhere between D30s and MSTAs i assume. As MAIN i guess MSTA-B would be representative.

    George1
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 9432
    Points : 9924
    Join date : 2011-12-22
    Location : Greece

    Re: Russian Gun Artillery: Discussion Thread

    Post  George1 on Wed Jan 06, 2016 12:21 pm

    Militarov wrote:
    George1 wrote:btw which is the main towed-gun of Russian Army??

    Most numerous is D30 howtizer, then comes MSTA-B, then Giatsint-B. I did not count Rapiras here, as they are specific platform, but their numbers would fit somewhere between D30s and MSTAs i assume. As MAIN i guess MSTA-B would be representative.

    Thanks. Rapira is a recoilless rifle


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


    Militarov
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 4812
    Points : 4859
    Join date : 2015-09-02
    Location : Serbia

    Re: Russian Gun Artillery: Discussion Thread

    Post  Militarov on Wed Jan 06, 2016 12:25 pm

    George1 wrote:
    Militarov wrote:
    George1 wrote:btw which is the main towed-gun of Russian Army??

    Most numerous is D30 howtizer, then comes MSTA-B, then Giatsint-B. I did not count Rapiras here, as they are specific platform, but their numbers would fit somewhere between D30s and MSTAs i assume. As MAIN i guess MSTA-B would be representative.

    Thanks. Rapira is a recoilless rifle

    Rapira would be AT gun in its primary role, however 100m is today nowhere near being powerful enough to fight tanks so they are today mostly used as casual fire support artillery.



    Like this. And its not rly recoiless Very Happy

    flamming_python
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 3182
    Points : 3310
    Join date : 2012-01-30

    Re: Russian Gun Artillery: Discussion Thread

    Post  flamming_python on Wed Jan 06, 2016 4:05 pm

    Militarov wrote:
    GarryB wrote:The 2A65 is the towed version of the MSTA... rather than buying M777 I would prefer to see a towed version of Coalition...

    Besides there is always Grad/Tornado...

    Towed coalition would be probably 6+ tons, that is not light howtizer by any means. What is goal here is to have 152mm howtizer weighting under 4,5 tons so Mi17 can slung it externally.

    Yes but since the Coalition has the longest range of any 152mm gun already, it's towed version can probably sacrifice some barrel length and still manage an impressive range, beating or equalling others of its class. Modern materials and construction can be used, like in the M777, and the 2A61 can be drawn a few lessons from - in terms of what works and what doesn't.
    And of course; fully digital control & sighting systems, GLONASS integration, modern ammo, compatibility with laser-guided shells, and all the rest of it.

    I think it's very feasible to end up with a versatile, towed, road-balanced 152mm gun, good in both mountains and on open ground, and light enough to be slung by Mi-17s.

    Militarov
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 4812
    Points : 4859
    Join date : 2015-09-02
    Location : Serbia

    Re: Russian Gun Artillery: Discussion Thread

    Post  Militarov on Wed Jan 06, 2016 4:36 pm

    flamming_python wrote:
    Militarov wrote:
    GarryB wrote:The 2A65 is the towed version of the MSTA... rather than buying M777 I would prefer to see a towed version of Coalition...

    Besides there is always Grad/Tornado...

    Towed coalition would be probably 6+ tons, that is not light howtizer by any means. What is goal here is to have 152mm howtizer weighting under 4,5 tons so Mi17 can slung it externally.

    Yes but since the Coalition has the longest range of any 152mm gun already, it's towed version can probably sacrifice some barrel length and still manage an impressive range, beating or equalling others of its class. Modern materials and construction can be used, like in the M777, and the 2A61 can be drawn a few lessons from - in terms of what works and what doesn't.
    And of course; fully digital control & sighting systems, GLONASS integration, modern ammo, compatibility with laser-guided shells, and all the rest of it.

    I think it's very feasible to end up with a versatile, towed, road-balanced 152mm gun, good in both mountains and on open ground, and light enough to be slung by Mi-17s.

    It surely is possible to make shorter "caliber" long towed version. Actually why not even two, one as field artillery being 52 and one lighter for mountain etc units with 39 caliber for an example. Bofors just finished developing their "heavy" towed 155mm howtizer The FH 77B05 L52 after all which means they still have future.


    eehnie
    Lieutenant
    Lieutenant

    Posts : 570
    Points : 595
    Join date : 2015-05-13

    Re: Russian Gun Artillery: Discussion Thread

    Post  eehnie on Wed Jan 06, 2016 5:25 pm

    From warfare.be Towed guns over man-portable size:

    Active service / Reserve / Gun:

    564 / 1300 / 2A18M D-30  (is the towed version of the self propelled 2S1)
    456 / 0000 / MT-12 Rapira
    396 / 0600 / 2A65B Msta-B  (is the towed version of the self propelled 2S19)
    131 / 1000 / 2A36 GiatsintB (is the towed version of the self propelled 2S5)
    018 / 0000 / 2B16 Nona-K (is the towed version of the self propelled 2S9)

    2201 / 3900 / Total

    In the archive section are also cited the M-30, M-46 and 2A45B SprutB (is the towed versión of the self propelled 2S25).


    Last edited by eehnie on Thu May 12, 2016 8:48 am; edited 1 time in total

    George1
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 9432
    Points : 9924
    Join date : 2011-12-22
    Location : Greece

    Re: Russian Gun Artillery: Discussion Thread

    Post  George1 on Wed Jan 06, 2016 5:43 pm

    2B16 Nona-K is the most modern to assume?


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


    Militarov
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 4812
    Points : 4859
    Join date : 2015-09-02
    Location : Serbia

    Re: Russian Gun Artillery: Discussion Thread

    Post  Militarov on Wed Jan 06, 2016 5:50 pm

    George1 wrote:2B16 Nona-K is the most modern to assume?

    Depends how you look at it but MSTA-B aka 2A65 should be considered newer. Nona-Ks tho were obtained in some numbers at about same time but heavily based on previous designs.

    eehnie
    Lieutenant
    Lieutenant

    Posts : 570
    Points : 595
    Join date : 2015-05-13

    Re: Russian Gun Artillery: Discussion Thread

    Post  eehnie on Wed Jan 06, 2016 6:13 pm

    George1 wrote:2B16 Nona-K is the most modern to assume?

    From the list 2B16 Nona-K and 2A65B Msta-B are both from the mid 80s. They would be the most recent of them. The Nona-K is still offered to export by Rosoboron Export.

    The towed arms over man-portable size offered still to export are:

    2A18M D-30
    2B16 Nona-K


    Last edited by eehnie on Thu May 12, 2016 8:49 am; edited 1 time in total

    eehnie
    Lieutenant
    Lieutenant

    Posts : 570
    Points : 595
    Join date : 2015-05-13

    Re: Russian Gun Artillery: Discussion Thread

    Post  eehnie on Wed Jan 06, 2016 6:51 pm

    Militarov wrote:
    eehnie wrote:
    The mortars of 82mm successors of the old 2B9 Vasilek (over 600Kg) are of man-portable size since the 1980s. The 2B14 Podnos is of 42 Kg, and the modern 2B24 and 2B25 have 45Kg and 13Kg of weight. This is the artillery of man-portable size I was talking about. It is succeeding in the Russian Armed Forces like the self propelled artillery.

    In the other side, in recent years the development of heavier towed artillery seems to have the purpose of developing guns for new self propelled artillery models and/or for export, since there is not a single model since the 80s succeeding with significant number or orders for the Russian Armed Forces. The 2B23 (over 400Kg) maybe the best known case and even has not English Wikipedia or warfare.be articles.

    https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/2%D0%9123

    Russia has some advantage here. Other countries have not enough developed their self propelled artillery to think about to replace the towed artillery, but Russia can think about it even in the short term. The movement is predictable since the current heavy towed artillery in service is from the 80s or before, and will not remain forever



    Mortars are rarely considered as an artillery, but ultra light infantry support weapon. In Serbian army if you call mortar in front of an officer as "an artillery piece" you will probably do 100 pushups. Mortars are mortars, artillery is an artillery.

    Also Vasilek is class of its own, its automatic mortar and it simply cant be replaced with something like 2B14, USSR operated 82mm mortars long before Vasilek came into service and still it found its place. Nona variations and variants are not replacement for Vasilek either, unless it gets phased out completely as idea of automatic mortar, but i am not sure about that still.

    Problem with self propelled artillery is that its useless in so many regions, it simply cant go to all the places it might be required. When D30 variants go to storages Russia is out of real light artillery. Nona-K for an example imo could replace D30, but what will fill the gap between Nona and MSTA/Coalition? Towed or even self mobile light howtizer in 152mm is equired, something like SLWH Pegasus for an example, abit weighty but still alot less than MSTA-B and helicopter transportable.


    Technologically a mortar is artillery and always will be. It is possible to make alternative classifications by function or by other criteria that are compatible with the technological classifications, Serbian oddities appart.

    I was talking about 2B14, 2B24 and 2B25 as successors of the 2B9 in terms of damage done by mortars of the same caliber. Today the concept of fight of the 2B9 Vasilek remains in mortars of bigger caliber, of 120mm.

    I'm not sure if the 2B9 Vasilek remains active as towed gun in Russia. I know these mortars have been mounted on MT-LBs making them self propelled (an obvious step when a country can use MT-LBs as tractors for the 2B9). I do not agree about the troubles of movility that you see in the self propelled guns over the towed guns.

    With the D-30 being the towed version of the 2S1, the natural replacement for the D-30 would be the 2S34 (the upgrade of the 2S1).

    flamming_python
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 3182
    Points : 3310
    Join date : 2012-01-30

    Re: Russian Gun Artillery: Discussion Thread

    Post  flamming_python on Wed Jan 06, 2016 11:05 pm

    eehnie wrote:
    Militarov wrote:
    eehnie wrote:
    The mortars of 82mm successors of the old 2B9 Vasilek (over 600Kg) are of man-portable size since the 1980s. The 2B14 Podnos is of 42 Kg, and the modern 2B24 and 2B25 have 45Kg and 13Kg of weight. This is the artillery of man-portable size I was talking about. It is succeeding in the Russian Armed Forces like the self propelled artillery.

    In the other side, in recent years the development of heavier towed artillery seems to have the purpose of developing guns for new self propelled artillery models and/or for export, since there is not a single model since the 80s succeeding with significant number or orders for the Russian Armed Forces. The 2B23 (over 400Kg) maybe the best known case and even has not English Wikipedia or warfare.be articles.

    https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/2%D0%9123

    Russia has some advantage here. Other countries have not enough developed their self propelled artillery to think about to replace the towed artillery, but Russia can think about it even in the short term. The movement is predictable since the current heavy towed artillery in service is from the 80s or before, and will not remain forever



    Mortars are rarely considered as an artillery, but ultra light infantry support weapon. In Serbian army if you call mortar in front of an officer as "an artillery piece" you will probably do 100 pushups. Mortars are mortars, artillery is an artillery.

    Also Vasilek is class of its own, its automatic mortar and it simply cant be replaced with something like 2B14, USSR operated 82mm mortars long before Vasilek came into service and still it found its place. Nona variations and variants are not replacement for Vasilek either, unless it gets phased out completely as idea of automatic mortar, but i am not sure about that still.

    Problem with self propelled artillery is that its useless in so many regions, it simply cant go to all the places it might be required. When D30 variants go to storages Russia is out of real light artillery. Nona-K for an example imo could replace D30, but what will fill the gap between Nona and MSTA/Coalition? Towed or even self mobile light howtizer in 152mm is equired, something like SLWH Pegasus for an example, abit weighty but still alot less than MSTA-B and helicopter transportable.


    Technologically a mortar is artillery and always will be. It is possible to make alternative classifications by function or by other criteria that are compatible with the technological classifications, Serbian oddities appart.

    I was talking about 2B14, 2B24 and 2B25 as successors of the 2B9 in terms of damage done by mortars of the same caliber. Today the concept of fight of the 2B9 Vasilek remains in mortars of bigger caliber, of 120mm.

    I'm not sure if the 2B9 Vasilek remains active as towed gun in Russia. I know these mortars have been mounted on MT-LBs making them self propelled (an obvious step when a country can use MT-LBs as tractors for the 2B9). I do not agree about the troubles of movility that you see in the self propelled guns over the towed guns.

    With the D-30 being the towed version of the 2S1, the natural replacement for the D-30 would be the 2S34 (the upgrade of the 2S1).

    You can't airlift SP artillery. And there are other considerations as discussed earlier in the thread.

    Towed artillery will continue to, at the least, in a niche of its own.

    Militarov
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 4812
    Points : 4859
    Join date : 2015-09-02
    Location : Serbia

    Re: Russian Gun Artillery: Discussion Thread

    Post  Militarov on Wed Jan 06, 2016 11:32 pm

    eehnie wrote:
    Militarov wrote:
    eehnie wrote:
    The mortars of 82mm successors of the old 2B9 Vasilek (over 600Kg) are of man-portable size since the 1980s. The 2B14 Podnos is of 42 Kg, and the modern 2B24 and 2B25 have 45Kg and 13Kg of weight. This is the artillery of man-portable size I was talking about. It is succeeding in the Russian Armed Forces like the self propelled artillery.

    In the other side, in recent years the development of heavier towed artillery seems to have the purpose of developing guns for new self propelled artillery models and/or for export, since there is not a single model since the 80s succeeding with significant number or orders for the Russian Armed Forces. The 2B23 (over 400Kg) maybe the best known case and even has not English Wikipedia or warfare.be articles.

    https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/2%D0%9123

    Russia has some advantage here. Other countries have not enough developed their self propelled artillery to think about to replace the towed artillery, but Russia can think about it even in the short term. The movement is predictable since the current heavy towed artillery in service is from the 80s or before, and will not remain forever



    Mortars are rarely considered as an artillery, but ultra light infantry support weapon. In Serbian army if you call mortar in front of an officer as "an artillery piece" you will probably do 100 pushups. Mortars are mortars, artillery is an artillery.

    Also Vasilek is class of its own, its automatic mortar and it simply cant be replaced with something like 2B14, USSR operated 82mm mortars long before Vasilek came into service and still it found its place. Nona variations and variants are not replacement for Vasilek either, unless it gets phased out completely as idea of automatic mortar, but i am not sure about that still.

    Problem with self propelled artillery is that its useless in so many regions, it simply cant go to all the places it might be required. When D30 variants go to storages Russia is out of real light artillery. Nona-K for an example imo could replace D30, but what will fill the gap between Nona and MSTA/Coalition? Towed or even self mobile light howtizer in 152mm is equired, something like SLWH Pegasus for an example, abit weighty but still alot less than MSTA-B and helicopter transportable.


    Technologically a mortar is artillery and always will be. It is possible to make alternative classifications by function or by other criteria that are compatible with the technological classifications, Serbian oddities appart.

    I was talking about 2B14, 2B24 and 2B25 as successors of the 2B9 in terms of damage done by mortars of the same caliber. Today the concept of fight of the 2B9 Vasilek remains in mortars of bigger caliber, of 120mm.

    I'm not sure if the 2B9 Vasilek remains active as towed gun in Russia. I know these mortars have been mounted on MT-LBs making them self propelled (an obvious step when a country can use MT-LBs as tractors for the 2B9). I do not agree about the troubles of movility that you see in the self propelled guns over the towed guns.

    With the D-30 being the towed version of the 2S1, the natural replacement for the D-30 would be the 2S (the upgrade of the 2S1).

    Actually by the book mortars of caliber less than 120mm are classified as "Infantry mortars" and are NEVER being refered to as an artillery piece. Mortars of 120, 140, 160, 240 and other calibers are often classified as an artillery pieces due to fact they are either placed on wheeled platforms or have carriages. But as long as they are "infantry mobile" they are not artillery pieces.

    While self propelled mortar 120mm i would call an artillery piece i would never call 60mm mortar that i can carry in one hand as such. By your logic 30mm automatic grenade launcher is also an artillery piece... however its not, its infantry weapon.

    When its about Vasilek yes, its still used as towed piece in VDV and Ukrainians use it also that way alot.

    Still you cant replace automatic 81mm mortar with random 120mm mortar, does not make much sense at all unless again as i said you are abandoning automatic mortar as idea totally.

    How and why would towed D30 be replaced with modernised already existing Gvozdikas with replaced main weapon? Maybe partially but that is not going to happen in my opinion, 2S34 Chosta is reported to have quite an issues. D30s might partially get replaced by something in class of Nona-K and then maybe they will "borrow" tracked 120mm long self propelled mortar from VDV but still neither of those are real and good 1on1 replacements.

    Light towed artillery has to exist no matter what you imagine. Self propelled howtizers have many advantages but also many disadvantages over good old towed pieces.

    eehnie
    Lieutenant
    Lieutenant

    Posts : 570
    Points : 595
    Join date : 2015-05-13

    Re: Russian Gun Artillery: Discussion Thread

    Post  eehnie on Thu Jan 07, 2016 1:27 am

    flamming_python wrote:You can't airlift SP artillery. And there are other considerations as discussed earlier in the thread.

    Towed artillery will continue to, at the least, in a niche of its own.

    The Russian Airborne Troops have SP artillery of various types (2S9, 2S23 and 2S25). Russia has not a trouble with the aerial transport of self propelled artillery. I do not think this is a trouble for Russia, and less when new SP artillery models can be developed to replace the current artillery of the Airborne Troops using the new chasis of the BMD-4M.

    flamming_python
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 3182
    Points : 3310
    Join date : 2012-01-30

    Re: Russian Gun Artillery: Discussion Thread

    Post  flamming_python on Thu Jan 07, 2016 1:52 am

    eehnie wrote:
    flamming_python wrote:You can't airlift SP artillery. And there are other considerations as discussed earlier in the thread.

    Towed artillery will continue to, at the least, in a niche of its own.

    The Russian Airborne Troops have SP artillery of various types (2S9, 2S23 and 2S25). Russia has not a trouble with the aerial transport of self propelled artillery. I do not think this is a trouble for Russia, and less when new SP artillery models can be developed to replace the current artillery of the Airborne Troops using the new chasis of the BMD-4M.

    That's a good point, but applies only for VDV. Mountain units and others won't have airlift-able artillery. Perhaps this is not a critical shortcoming, dunno.

    Militarov
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 4812
    Points : 4859
    Join date : 2015-09-02
    Location : Serbia

    Re: Russian Gun Artillery: Discussion Thread

    Post  Militarov on Thu Jan 07, 2016 2:05 am

    flamming_python wrote:
    eehnie wrote:
    flamming_python wrote:You can't airlift SP artillery. And there are other considerations as discussed earlier in the thread.

    Towed artillery will continue to, at the least, in a niche of its own.

    The Russian Airborne Troops have SP artillery of various types (2S9, 2S23 and 2S25). Russia has not a trouble with the aerial transport of self propelled artillery. I do not think this is a trouble for Russia, and less when new SP artillery models can be developed to replace the current artillery of the Airborne Troops using the new chasis of the BMD-4M.

    That's a good point, but applies only for VDV. Mountain units and others won't have airlift-able artillery. Perhaps this is not a critical shortcoming, dunno.

    Americans in Afganistan praised 105mm M118 light howtizers even over already "feather" class M777 for an example coz they are so light they can be even parachuted without boosters, airlifted by even fairly light helicopters, pushed by 2 men only for short distances, no need for recoil pit, extremly fast change of targets, very high rate of fire coz loaders work with light shells and ability to be towed around even by lightest vehicles.

    Mobility, Mobility and Mobility especially needed in VDV and mountain units. There are simply wast forests and mountains where nothing except bird can land. You have examples also like GIAT LG1, G7, M56... all 105mm howtizers mainly used by units that require artillery support but also need extremly high mobility.

    eehnie
    Lieutenant
    Lieutenant

    Posts : 570
    Points : 595
    Join date : 2015-05-13

    Re: Russian Gun Artillery: Discussion Thread

    Post  eehnie on Thu Jan 07, 2016 2:18 am

    Militarov wrote:
    eehnie wrote:
    Militarov wrote:
    eehnie wrote:
    The mortars of 82mm successors of the old 2B9 Vasilek (over 600Kg) are of man-portable size since the 1980s. The 2B14 Podnos is of 42 Kg, and the modern 2B24 and 2B25 have 45Kg and 13Kg of weight. This is the artillery of man-portable size I was talking about. It is succeeding in the Russian Armed Forces like the self propelled artillery.

    In the other side, in recent years the development of heavier towed artillery seems to have the purpose of developing guns for new self propelled artillery models and/or for export, since there is not a single model since the 80s succeeding with significant number or orders for the Russian Armed Forces. The 2B23 (over 400Kg) maybe the best known case and even has not English Wikipedia or warfare.be articles.

    https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/2%D0%9123

    Russia has some advantage here. Other countries have not enough developed their self propelled artillery to think about to replace the towed artillery, but Russia can think about it even in the short term. The movement is predictable since the current heavy towed artillery in service is from the 80s or before, and will not remain forever



    Mortars are rarely considered as an artillery, but ultra light infantry support weapon. In Serbian army if you call mortar in front of an officer as "an artillery piece" you will probably do 100 pushups. Mortars are mortars, artillery is an artillery.

    Also Vasilek is class of its own, its automatic mortar and it simply cant be replaced with something like 2B14, USSR operated 82mm mortars long before Vasilek came into service and still it found its place. Nona variations and variants are not replacement for Vasilek either, unless it gets phased out completely as idea of automatic mortar, but i am not sure about that still.

    Problem with self propelled artillery is that its useless in so many regions, it simply cant go to all the places it might be required. When D30 variants go to storages Russia is out of real light artillery. Nona-K for an example imo could replace D30, but what will fill the gap between Nona and MSTA/Coalition? Towed or even self mobile light howtizer in 152mm is equired, something like SLWH Pegasus for an example, abit weighty but still alot less than MSTA-B and helicopter transportable.


    Technologically a mortar is artillery and always will be. It is possible to make alternative classifications by function or by other criteria that are compatible with the technological classifications, Serbian oddities appart.

    I was talking about 2B14, 2B24 and 2B25 as successors of the 2B9 in terms of damage done by mortars of the same caliber. Today the concept of fight of the 2B9 Vasilek remains in mortars of bigger caliber, of 120mm.

    I'm not sure if the 2B9 Vasilek remains active as towed gun in Russia. I know these mortars have been mounted on MT-LBs making them self propelled (an obvious step when a country can use MT-LBs as tractors for the 2B9). I do not agree about the troubles of movility that you see in the self propelled guns over the towed guns.

    With the D-30 being the towed version of the 2S1, the natural replacement for the D-30 would be the 2S (the upgrade of the 2S1).

    Actually by the book mortars of caliber less than 120mm are classified as "Infantry mortars" and are NEVER being refered to as an artillery piece. Mortars of 120, 140, 160, 240 and other calibers are often classified as an artillery pieces due to fact they are either placed on wheeled platforms or have carriages. But as long as they are "infantry mobile" they are not artillery pieces.

    While self propelled mortar 120mm i would call an artillery piece i would never call 60mm mortar that i can carry in one hand as such. By your logic 30mm automatic grenade launcher is also an artillery piece... however its not, its infantry weapon.

    When its about Vasilek yes, its still used as towed piece in VDV and Ukrainians use it also that way alot.

    Still you cant replace automatic 81mm mortar with random 120mm mortar, does not make much sense at all unless again as i said you are abandoning automatic mortar as idea totally.

    How and why would towed D30 be replaced with modernised already existing Gvozdikas with replaced main weapon? Maybe partially but that is not going to happen in my opinion, 2S34 Chosta is reported to have quite an issues. D30s might partially get replaced by something in class of Nona-K and then maybe they will "borrow" tracked 120mm long self propelled mortar from VDV but still neither of those are real and good 1on1 replacements.

    Light towed artillery has to exist no matter what you imagine. Self propelled howtizers have many advantages but also many disadvantages over good old towed pieces.

    Personally I'm not friend of classifications based on calibers because they give many troubles in a longer timeline. As example if you try to apply your classification to WWII guns, you have a trouble because today's calibers are different. To be man-portable is the characteristic that can make us able to talk about "infantry mortars", but even in this case, infantry mortars are technologically mortars, and are technologically artillery.

    Our gun classifications need to be stable with the time, need to be valid for guns of different centuries. This is why I prefer and I use classifications based on technologies.

    I expect a success of the 2S34 because I expect the new gun to be well selected. It is the key of this project. But if the 2S34 is not successful, new SP artillery models will come surely using both the chasis of the 2S1 and the new chasis of the BMD-4M. The question is that Russia can replace all the active D-30s in the short term using its self propelled twin, the 2S1 since Russia has enough of them in the reserve.

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15465
    Points : 16172
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Russian Gun Artillery: Discussion Thread

    Post  GarryB on Thu Jan 07, 2016 9:04 am

    With most infantry units having a BMP-3 with them not having a towed artillery piece for fire support is likely not so much of a problem as they already have quite a bit of indirect He fire power out to 7km range already.

    In terms of HE ranged fire power I would expect long barrel 120mm gun/mortars with the range of a 122mm piece but the ability to use a range of rounds including mortar bombs and shells and indeed guided munitions developed for the 120mm weapons and also the 122mm guided rounds I would expect a towed 120mm gun mortar would actually be just as useful as the M777 but would be lighter... AFAIK the towed model of the NONA-K is something like 1.2 tons which should be easily air portable by helo... even a Ka-60 will be able to carry that... So what if the M777 can outrange it... if range is a factor then a light truck with a 6 tube 300mm rocket artillery pod... targets 120kms away are not safe...

    The question is that Russia can replace all the active D-30s in the short term using its self propelled twin, the 2S1 since Russia has enough of them in the reserve.

    The Russian military have a long tradition of towed artillery pieces and also towed anti tank guns like Sprut... which are actually just tank guns on towed mounts... no projectile length limitations there BTW....

    I would expect they will make a towed model of Coalition too.


    _________________
    “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

    eehnie
    Lieutenant
    Lieutenant

    Posts : 570
    Points : 595
    Join date : 2015-05-13

    Re: Russian Gun Artillery: Discussion Thread

    Post  eehnie on Sat Jan 09, 2016 4:27 am

    franco wrote:
    George1 wrote:Eastern Military district units armed with 2S7 Pion. So these pieces are from stored capacity probably not new of course

    https://translate.googleusercontent.com/translate_c?depth=3&hl=en&rurl=translate.google.com&sl=auto&tl=en&u=http://ria.ru/defense_safety/20151203/1334820325.html&usg=ALkJrhjjmB-6EaVHaf6bW64UKCVHALKXVA

    There was a story last month that they also got a 2S4 unit of 240mm SP Mortar's. Don't know if the single units of each staged in Tambov were transferred East or second units was formed. There were several hundred of each in the reserve.

    It would be interesting to know what pieces are replacing the 2S4 and 2S7 returned to the service. I tend to think that are towed pieces.

    Militarov
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 4812
    Points : 4859
    Join date : 2015-09-02
    Location : Serbia

    Re: Russian Gun Artillery: Discussion Thread

    Post  Militarov on Sat Jan 09, 2016 4:32 am

    eehnie wrote:
    franco wrote:
    George1 wrote:Eastern Military district units armed with 2S7 Pion. So these pieces are from stored capacity probably not new of course

    https://translate.googleusercontent.com/translate_c?depth=3&hl=en&rurl=translate.google.com&sl=auto&tl=en&u=http://ria.ru/defense_safety/20151203/1334820325.html&usg=ALkJrhjjmB-6EaVHaf6bW64UKCVHALKXVA

    There was a story last month that they also got a 2S4 unit of 240mm SP Mortar's. Don't know if the single units of each staged in Tambov were transferred East or second units was formed. There were several hundred of each in the reserve.

    It would be interesting to know what pieces are replacing the 2S4 and 2S7 returned to the service. I tend to think that are towed pieces.

    From what i could figure out from articles i saw those are not replacing anything but it seems they are newly formed batteries attached to already existing units.

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15465
    Points : 16172
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Russian Gun Artillery: Discussion Thread

    Post  GarryB on Sat Jan 09, 2016 8:09 am

    Like a special reserve for tough targets that need an extra punch.

    I would suspect they would also be more useful in some roles like mountains and urban where the near vertical descent of the rounds would make them rather more useful for getting between buildings or cliffs.


    _________________
    “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

    eehnie
    Lieutenant
    Lieutenant

    Posts : 570
    Points : 595
    Join date : 2015-05-13

    Re: Russian Gun Artillery: Discussion Thread

    Post  eehnie on Tue Jan 12, 2016 11:20 am

    Militarov wrote:
    flamming_python wrote:
    Militarov wrote:
    GarryB wrote:The 2A65 is the towed version of the MSTA... rather than buying M777 I would prefer to see a towed version of Coalition...

    Besides there is always Grad/Tornado...

    Towed coalition would be probably 6+ tons, that is not light howtizer by any means. What is goal here is to have 152mm howtizer weighting under 4,5 tons so Mi17 can slung it externally.

    Yes but since the Coalition has the longest range of any 152mm gun already, it's towed version can probably sacrifice some barrel length and still manage an impressive range, beating or equalling others of its class. Modern materials and construction can be used, like in the M777, and the 2A61 can be drawn a few lessons from - in terms of what works and what doesn't.
    And of course; fully digital control & sighting systems, GLONASS integration, modern ammo, compatibility with laser-guided shells, and all the rest of it.

    I think it's very feasible to end up with a versatile, towed, road-balanced 152mm gun, good in both mountains and on open ground, and light enough to be slung by Mi-17s.

    It surely is possible to make shorter "caliber" long towed version. Actually why not even two, one as field artillery being 52 and one lighter for mountain etc units with 39 caliber for an example. Bofors just finished developing their "heavy" towed 155mm howtizer The FH 77B05 L52 after all which means they still have future.


    This is open to interpretations. To see other countries developing towed guns over man-portable size can mean them being back of Russia on this.

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15465
    Points : 16172
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Russian Gun Artillery: Discussion Thread

    Post  GarryB on Wed Jan 13, 2016 10:10 am

    Russia has always had towed guns and is unlikely to get rid of them now... they are simple and cheap and still very effective.

    There is nothing man portable that is equivalent to a 122mm D-30 Artillery piece.


    _________________
    “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

    eehnie
    Lieutenant
    Lieutenant

    Posts : 570
    Points : 595
    Join date : 2015-05-13

    Re: Russian Gun Artillery: Discussion Thread

    Post  eehnie on Wed Jan 13, 2016 12:05 pm

    GarryB wrote:Russia has always had towed guns and is unlikely to get rid of them now... they are simple and cheap and still very effective.

    There is nothing man portable that is equivalent to a 122mm D-30 Artillery piece.

    Well towed guns are cheap for the armies where the human factor is not important in economic terms. It is cheap while the soldiers of their big crews are unpayed or low payed. Also are cheap while "civil" style unarmoured trucks are used as tractors even in contested areas. In professional and advanced armies with decently payed soldiers and armored vehicles as tractors, the economic balance for the towed arms vs the self-propelled or the man-portable begins to be different.

    Russia is a leader wordlwide in self propelled guns. It is one of the few countries that is affording the costs of development, and surely is the alone that is covering the whole range. The European research as example is a lot more inefficient, with many countries developing tanks, apcs and ifvs and almost no-one developing the rest of the range of self propelled guns.

    Russia has done the evolution from heavy towed guns to self-propelled or man-portable guns in the areas of surface-air and surface-surface guns. Only some of the biggest towed intercontinental missiles remain in active service and their number is decreasing. There are not reasons to think that the same will not happen in the areas of anti-tank guns, howitzers and mortars. There is a very clear trend there.

    It means not that heavy towed artillery is unuseful. The heavy towed guns can remain in the reserve while Russia reach the saturation of their reserves of self propelled guns. As example, the heavy towed guns are being important for Novorussia, but the Russian army is one step more advanced.

    Sponsored content

    Re: Russian Gun Artillery: Discussion Thread

    Post  Sponsored content Today at 8:38 pm


      Current date/time is Mon Dec 05, 2016 8:38 pm