Old AA Guns | S-60 57mm and ZSU 23-4: Views

first of all this kind of equipment would need to have a tracking sistem...else is useles...... being radar , IR , video , you name it.....
it would need a target analysis software (estimate of speed and direction....and ofcourse point of interception)
then all those data must be transformed into a turret moving coresponding to the data's ..... this would mean to know how to make a corelation between the movement and the data ....and this is a software engineer bussines ......

ofcourse that those kind of old manned manipulated sistems are obsolete for the obvious reason that you will end your ammo before you can really hit the target ......

but also lets mention that a rocket like the tomahawk or something are hard shielded for a projectile like bullets (even being big sized)......

victor1985 wrote:first of all this kind of equipment would need to have a tracking sistem...else is useles...... being radar , IR , video , you name it.....
it would need a target analysis software (estimate of speed and direction....and ofcourse point of interception)
then all those data must be transformed into a turret moving coresponding to the data's ..... this would mean to know how to make a corelation between the movement and the data ....and this is a software engineer bussines ......

ofcourse that those kind of old manned manipulated sistems are obsolete for the obvious reason that you will end your ammo before you can really hit the target ......

but also lets mention that a rocket like the tomahawk or something are hard shielded for a projectile like bullets (even being big sized)......

so what your saying is a tomahawk has better armour than an IFV???? as 57mm, are more than capable of penetrating IFV, and to some extend so does 37mm, 23.5mm, i highly doubt a tomahawk could deflect 14.5mm never mind the rest, but i could be wrong,

I remember a towed trailer designed for the SOSNA-R hypersonic short range missiles... it had a single twin barrel 30mm cannon (2A38M from Tunguska) and a quad launcher for 4 SOSNA-R SAMs with two stage missiles and a range of 10km. The trailer had a ball turret with an EO targeting system but no radar.

I was thinking at the time that it would be an ideal base system for whatever gun missile combination you wanted... the twin barrel 30mm gun could be replaced with 12.7mm, 14.5mm, 23mm or the 30mm calibre weapon fitted and the missiles could be SOSNA or Igla or Igla-S or Verba. The auto tracking ball turret would allow 24/7 all weather engagement of targets no matter what the EW equipment used by the enemy.

It could be tied into the AD network or used on its own and would be cheap and light and relatively mobile.

http://i86.servimg.com/u/f86/15/11/39/27/abwa4p10.jpg

Such a towed trailer would be ideal for use against enemy ground forces and aircraft... or mounted on an armoured vehicle.

GarryB wrote:I remember a towed trailer designed for the SOSNA-R hypersonic short range missiles... it had a single twin barrel 30mm cannon (2A38M from Tunguska) and a quad launcher for 4 SOSNA-R SAMs with two stage missiles and a range of 10km. The trailer had a ball turret with an EO targeting system but no radar.

I was thinking at the time that it would be an ideal base system for whatever gun missile combination you wanted... the twin barrel 30mm gun could be replaced with 12.7mm, 14.5mm, 23mm or the 30mm calibre weapon fitted and the missiles could be SOSNA or Igla or Igla-S or Verba. The auto tracking ball turret would allow 24/7 all weather engagement of targets no matter what the EW equipment used by the enemy.

It could be tied into the AD network or used on its own and would be cheap and light and relatively mobile.

http://i86.servimg.com/u/f86/15/11/39/27/abwa4p10.jpg

Such a towed trailer would be ideal for use against enemy ground forces and aircraft... or mounted on an armoured vehicle.

that i like,

the great thing about this system as you rightly said is varieties/combinations can be tailored made to customers needs or what calibre they currently use. As always there is some great ideas out there its a real shame they never get put into production or get pushed on the export front

and now Iran's new upgraded version of ZSU-57-2

http://armyrecognition.com/weapons_defence_industry_military_technology_uk/new_bahman_57mm_6x6_self-propelled_anti-aicraft_twin_gun_unveiled_by_iranian_armed_forces_11404162.html

Iran Defense Industry has developed a new wheeled self-propelled anti-aircraft gun system under the name of "Bahman", the vehicle was unveiled on Wednesday, April 13, 2016, during a ceremony on the occasion of the Army Day, attended by the Ground Force Commander Brigadier General Ahmad Reza Pourdastan.
The Bahman is 57mm twin-cannon self-propelled wheeled air defense system designed and manufacture by the Iranian defense industry. The vehicle is based on Ukrainian-made 6x6 truck chassis KrAZ-6322.

The Bahman seems to equipped with a modified turret of Soviet-made ZSU-57-2 self-propelled anti-aircraft gun. Main armament consists of twin 57mm S-68 guns which have the same performance and use the same ammunition as the towed single S-60 anti-aircraft gun. The turret is mounted at the rear of the truck chassis.

The turret has an elevation an elevation of +85º, depression of -5º and 360º turret traverse. Elevation, depression and turret traverse are powered, with manual controls available for emergency use.

The original Soviet-made ZSU-57-2 has a rate of fire of 105 to 120 rds/min with a practical rate of fire of 70 rds/gun/min. Maximum horizontal range is 12,000 m, maximum vertical range 8,000 m, although effective ranges are less than this. Effective slant range is 3,993 m, effective altitude limit with weapons elevated at +45º is 2,835 m and effective altitude limit with weapons elevated at +65º is 4,237 m.
In firing position, the vehicle is stabilized by the use of two large hydraulic spades lowered on the ground on each side of the turret.

d_taddei2 wrote:...and now Iran's new upgraded version of ZSU-57-2...

Thx Taddei2
It could be useful for Iran, and especially for its friends and allies like Hizbollah. It could not deter, but could really complicate any israeli's aggression.
However the article is written by Armyrecongnition. As any western think tanks, they try either to despise, or to minimize the impact of weapons produced by US' adversaries. I beware of all western's websites. In my view this Bahman could exceed 7.000 if not 8.000 meters in practical vertical range. The AZP S-60 was designed in the late of 40's, 70 years after in my view the engineers could overcome its initial limitations, especially regarding its ammunitions. For that reason I think this weapon with modern design regarding its fire direction, with passive mode, and of course its power, the gun may reach 10.000 meters in vertical range, if not more. Hence this anti-aircraft hardware could be a real nightmare for any western fighter bomber trying to attack a target.

nemrod wrote:

d_taddei2 wrote:...and now Iran's new upgraded version of ZSU-57-2...

Thx Taddei2
It could be useful for Iran, and especially for its friends and allies like Hizbollah. It could not deter, but could really complicate any israeli's aggression.
However the article is written by Armyrecongnition. As any western think tanks, they try either to despise, or to minimize the impact of weapons produced by US' adversaries. I beware of all western's websites. In my view this Bahman could exceed 7.000 if not 8.000 meters in practical vertical range. The AZP S-60 was designed in the late of 40's, 70 years after in my view the engineers could overcome its initial limitations, especially regarding its ammunitions. For that reason I think this weapon with modern design regarding its fire direction, with passive mode, and of course its power, the gun may reach 10.000 meters in vertical range, if not more. Hence this anti-aircraft hardware could be a real nightmare for any western fighter bomber trying to attack a target.

no problem,

I quite agree i this could also be good at long range fire support for ground troops, park this behind a large mound of earth and let rip. Would make short work of AFV's

d_taddei2 wrote:
I quite agree i this could also be good at long range fire support for ground troops, park this behind a large mound of earth and let rip. Would make short work of AFV's

I did not mean Iam right, U must be know better than me regarding this subject.
I just asserted that as the iranian hardware is a kind of modernized  ZSU-57-2, it is highly possible after 70 years that iranian engineers overcame some intrinsic limitations of the original AZP S-60's cannon. I think Iranian engineers worked on extending the range of gun -more than 10.000 meters- by designing new ammunitions -better velocity, and penetration, like modern AP-T for example -, and its fire direction system, relying on passive detection rather than radars. I suppose, Iam not sure. If the Bahman's ammunitions reaches 1.800 m/s, and they could overpass 10.000 meters altitude, it could be a redoubtable danger for any western fighter bombers, including the F-22. US Air Force could jam SAM missiles, but hardly AAA.

Isos wrote:
Does russia have something like that ?

Yes, see our discussion about iranian ZSU-57-2 dubbed "Bahman" above. But Russia, seems to give up AAA, and prefer to bet on missiles. However there are other solutions like SA-19 Grison -dubbed Tunkuska-, and SA-22 Greyhound - dubbed Pantsir-.

Isos wrote:
Is it effective against cruise or anti ship missiles ?

against small boat maybe effective, but one cannon firing against cruise missiles, or anti ship missiles, I don't think so, except if you have subsonic cruise missiles, or anti ship missiles, and you have a battery compsed with at least 30 guns like that firing in the same time. Maybe the best solution stays the Gattling guns as GAU familly, or Shiponow family -dubbed Kahstan-.

nemrod wrote:

d_taddei2 wrote:
I quite agree i this could also be good at long range fire support for ground troops, park this behind a large mound of earth and let rip. Would make short work of AFV's

I did not mean Iam right, U must be know better than me regarding this subject.
I just asserted that as the iranian hardware is a kind of modernized  ZSU-57-2, it is highly possible after 70 years that iranian engineers overcame some intrinsic limitations of the original AZP S-60's cannon. I think Iranian engineers worked on extending the range of gun -more than 10.000 meters- by designing new ammunitions -better velocity, and penetration, like modern AP-T for example -, and its fire direction system, relying on passive detection rather than radars. I suppose, Iam not sure. If the Bahman's ammunitions reaches 1.800 m/s, and they could overpass 10.000 meters altitude, it could be a redoubtable danger for any western fighter bombers, including the F-22. US Air Force could jam SAM missiles, but hardly AAA.

i am agreeing with you because i believe what your saying could well be right, advances in tech,i can only assume that rounds and systems have been upgraded and a some drawbacks of the past been sorted, but being Iran not much info has been shared into that much depth.

I quite agree i this could also be good at long range fire support for ground troops, park this behind a large mound of earth and let rip. Would make short work of AFV's

Wouldn't want too big a pile of dirt as they are high velocity flat shooting guns...

If the Bahman's ammunitions reaches 1.800 m/s, and they could overpass 10.000 meters altitude, it could be a redoubtable danger for any western fighter bombers, including the F-22. US Air Force could jam SAM missiles, but hardly AAA.

Much easier to use S-300 for that.

The 57mm shell this weapon uses is very powerful and would defeat even the best armoured aircraft with one or two shots... with guided shells and being tied in to an air defence network it would be a very effective system for bringing down cruise missiles... I would add a laser rangefinder and EO ball and change it from a 4 round clip feed to a fully automatic belt feed with an unmanned turret.

As it is it is a cheap powerful ground support and light anti aircraft system. I would not waste ammo firing at very long range targets without guided shells... this vehicle likely carries about 300 rounds, so only firing at targets within about 5km would make sure you get hits.

Does russia have something like that ? Is it effective against cruise or anti ship missiles ?

they are developing guided shells for their 57mm naval guns, though I suspect the same guided shells in larger calibres will be even more effective and more powerful.

They are also introducing a new high velocity 57mm gun for use against enemy IFVs that also uses guided rounds.

they also have rounds with timed fuses to detonate over targets... for their 125mm tank guns... ANIET.

Yes, see our discussion about iranian ZSU-57-2 dubbed "Bahman" above. But Russia, seems to give up AAA, and prefer to bet on missiles. However there are other solutions like SA-19 Grison -dubbed Tunkuska-, and SA-22 Greyhound - dubbed Pantsir-.

The naval tunguska is called Kashtan and Kashtan-M and they also have Palma and soon Pantsir-M, and also Morfei.

Not to mention proximity fused rounds in 76mm and 100mm and 130mm calibres.

Its mainly used as naval gun, rather than "air defence gun", USSR had in same caliber ЗИФ-75 but it did not survive to this day i belive, was around till 90s but it was not nearly "advanced" as the Bofors you are wondering about.

Russians switched to "bigger" guns mostly 76mm and 100/120mm on bigger ships.

Atm closest that Russia is active in fielding is AK-176 76mm gun, however its direct counterpart would be Otobreda Melara 76mm.

It should be actually fairly effective aganist aerial targets due to its very high rate of fire, FCS and programmable ammunition.

AFAIK the Russians have a new 57mm gun for naval use that will use the new guided shells developed for the Army, and no doubt include a HE round with a time fuse like they developed for their 30mm cannons and 125mm cannons.