Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    New Airborne SP Artilliery Systems

    Share

    Mindstorm

    Posts : 776
    Points : 953
    Join date : 2011-07-20

    Re: New Airborne SP Artilliery Systems

    Post  Mindstorm on Tue Oct 18, 2016 10:24 am


    Perspective air droppable self propelled artillery for VDV ,denomination "Лотос", has officially replaced the project "Зауральцем-Д" and the first prototype will be created for next year.


    "Лотос" offer increased performances in comparison with the former project, in particular in relation to the range of engagement parameter and possibility to employ the new generation of unified artillery rounds with widely expanded capabilities now in development.

    Obviously the expanded engagement range of the system in comparison to "Зауральцем-Д" has been the main reason for the selection of "Лотос" because it work as a force multiplier element for an high mobility force designed to operate behind enemy second echelon frontline.

    http://vpk.name/news/165831_opyitnyii_obrazec_samohodnogo_orudiya_lotos_dlya_vdv_sozdadut_v_2017_godu.html
    avatar
    eehnie

    Posts : 1552
    Points : 1577
    Join date : 2015-05-13

    Re: New Airborne SP Artilliery Systems

    Post  eehnie on Fri Mar 10, 2017 4:11 pm

    Mindstorm wrote:
    Perspective air droppable self propelled artillery for VDV ,denomination "Лотос", has officially replaced the project "Зауральцем-Д" and the first prototype will be created for next year.


    "Лотос" offer increased performances in comparison with the former project, in particular in relation to the range of engagement parameter and possibility to employ the new generation of unified artillery rounds with widely expanded capabilities now in development.

    Obviously the expanded engagement range of the system in comparison to "Зауральцем-Д" has been the main reason for the selection of "Лотос" because it work as a force multiplier element for an high mobility force designed to operate behind enemy second echelon frontline.

    http://vpk.name/news/165831_opyitnyii_obrazec_samohodnogo_orudiya_lotos_dlya_vdv_sozdadut_v_2017_godu.html

    Interesting article.
    avatar
    George1

    Posts : 10666
    Points : 11145
    Join date : 2011-12-22
    Location : Greece

    Re: New Airborne SP Artilliery Systems

    Post  George1 on Sun Aug 27, 2017 2:41 am

    120-mm self-propelled artillery system 2S42 on R&D "Lotos"

    According to the Web-resource "Bulletin of Mordovia", at the International Military Technical Forum "Army-2017" the Main Missile and Artillery Directorate of the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation at its stand, among other things, demonstrated the model of the prospective 120-mm self-propelled artillery unit 2S42 for the Air- Landing troops, created for the R & D Lotos, with the leading role of JSC Central Scientific Research Institute of Precision Engineering (JSC TsNIITOCHMASH).



    The 2S42 system is designed to replace 120mm self-propelled artillery guns Airborne 2S9 Nona-S, 2S9-1 Sviristelka, 2S9-1M Nona-SM.

    Declared characteristics of 2C42:

    - The maximum range of fire is 13 km.
    - The minimum range is 1 km.
    - Aimed rate of fire - 6-8 shots / min.
    - Angles of tool guidance:
    Horizontally: 360 degrees.
    Vertically: from -4 to +80 degrees.
    - Time of transfer from the marching position and back: 30 seconds.
    - The weight of the CAO is 18 tons.
    - Maximum speed:
    On the highway: 70km/h.
    On the ground: 40km/h.
    -Power reserve: 500 km
    - Crew:4 people.

    On the bmpd side, we note that in 2016 Dmitry Semizorov, CEO of TsNIITOCHMASH JSC, in his interviews stated that the first prototype of the CAO for Lotus R & D should be built in 2017, with the completion of the State testing of the system in 2019 and the transfer to Serial production in 2020.

    As can be judged, SAO 2S42 uses an extended seven-kiloton chassis on the basis of BMD-4M and will be equipped with a highly automated turret fighting compartment with a 120-mm gun.

    The Lotos R&D on the creation of a new CAO 2S42 in caliber 120 mm for the Airborne Forces of Russia was started in 2016 in place of the previously created TsNIITOCHMASh for the airborne advanced self-propelled artillery unit 2S36 with a 152mm 2A89 howitzer for the Zauralets-D missile systems. Works on R&D "Zauralets-D" were suspended after the completion of the preliminary tests of prototypes SAU 2S36 in 2015.




    http://bmpd.livejournal.com/2812358.html


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

    avatar
    eehnie

    Posts : 1552
    Points : 1577
    Join date : 2015-05-13

    Re: New Airborne SP Artilliery Systems

    Post  eehnie on Sun Aug 27, 2017 4:21 am

    This is a concep in line with the current Russian standards for new material, very likely to go forward easily in the tests, and very likely to go forward in the plans for procurement.

    just curious about the 2S37, 2S39, 2S40 and 2S41.
    avatar
    George1

    Posts : 10666
    Points : 11145
    Join date : 2011-12-22
    Location : Greece

    Re: New Airborne SP Artilliery Systems

    Post  George1 on Sun Aug 27, 2017 4:31 am

    eehnie wrote:This is a concep in line with the current Russian standards for new material, very likely to go forward easily in the tests, and very likely to go forward in the plans for procurement.

    just curious about the 2S37, 2S39, 2S40 and 2S41.

    2S42 seems to be a SP Mortar, what do you think?


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

    avatar
    eehnie

    Posts : 1552
    Points : 1577
    Join date : 2015-05-13

    Re: New Airborne SP Artilliery Systems

    Post  eehnie on Sun Aug 27, 2017 6:58 am

    George1 wrote:
    eehnie wrote:This is a concep in line with the current Russian standards for new material, very likely to go forward easily in the tests, and very likely to go forward in the plans for procurement.

    just curious about the 2S37, 2S39, 2S40 and 2S41.

    2S42 seems to be a SP Mortar, what do you think?

    This is a very easy combination to do, and likely to be a success. If I'm not wrong it continues with the recent 120mm weapon, the 2A80, and also is based on the BMD-4M platform. Both have been tested and approved. For me this can be a safe bet that can go without problems to production in a short timeline.

    This article is very interesting in one detail. First the media was talking about the 2S36 Zauralets-D like just this combination of the 2A80 weapon with the BMD-4M. Later it was published that the 2S36 was rejected and the Lotos (now designed as 2S42) was this combination. And then the 2S36 was considered like the 2A80 weapon over a previous platform (it was a project over the Tigr). Well now we know something different. Now the 2S36 Zauralets-D seems to be the 2A89 weapon of 152mm over the BMD-4M platform, and likely was rejected because the weapon was too heavy for the platform.

    For other heavier platforms (Armata, Kurganets and Bumerang) likely the 2A89 weapon of 152mm will be likely the first option over the 120mm. And likely these platforms will resist well the weapon. I was thinking it before, but as consequence of this seems unlikely to see the 2A80 weapon used this way on the Armata, Kurganets and Bumerang platforms. The basic self propelled mortar style firing weapon for these platforms will be likely of 152mm with this 2A89 weapon.

    It seems I was right about the likely appearance of an equivalent weapon to the 2A80 for 152mm for its use in self propelled artillery.

    http://www.russiadefence.net/t1606p175-russian-gun-artillery-discussion-thread#170698 (and following messages)

    A more complete and well updated comment about what I expect today in the refered to artillery systems would be here (this new Lotos is cited in the point 8 ):

    http://www.russiadefence.net/t2358p400-state-armaments-program-2011-2020#198050

    T-47

    Posts : 211
    Points : 215
    Join date : 2017-07-17
    Location : Planet Earth

    Re: New Airborne SP Artilliery Systems

    Post  T-47 on Sun Aug 27, 2017 12:05 pm

    Why using 120mm? Why not the 122?
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16741
    Points : 17349
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: New Airborne SP Artilliery Systems

    Post  GarryB on Mon Aug 28, 2017 10:05 am

    The 122mm and 120mm gun/mortar have very similar performance with the 120mm mortar being the standard medium mortar and already in Russian units as the standard vehicle mounted mortar, the 122mm is a largely obsolete towed and self propelled gun.

    The self propelled model is in service in large numbers in the form of the 2S1, which is rapidly being replaced with the very similar 2S34 with a 120mm gun/mortar.

    Very simply the 120mm gun/mortar can fire shells as powerful as the 122mm shells to a similar range, but it can also fire mortar bombs of 120mm calibre and the guided missiles of the 122mm and 120mm types in the Soviet arsenal.

    It simply makes sense to eliminate the 122mm calibre as being redundant.

    Regarding the future of the 152mm gun/mortar we need to see the reasons it was rejected.

    The larger calibre means increased weight, but does it improve performance enough to warrant its use?

    Is it more accurate, does it have a better range, are the shells significantly more effective.

    Right now 125mm tank guns continue to be used because they are still good enough and the lighter rounds means easier logistics and more ammo in each vehicle etc etc.

    There will come a time when 152mm tank rounds are needed and they will have been developed to even better than what they are now, but until then the 125mm round is in service and is cheaper.

    I suspect the same for the 120mm gun/mortar.


    _________________
    “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
    George1

    Posts : 10666
    Points : 11145
    Join date : 2011-12-22
    Location : Greece

    Re: New Airborne SP Artilliery Systems

    Post  George1 on Tue Aug 29, 2017 1:43 am

    2S41 "Drok" - 82mm self-propelled mortar.

    According to the web-resource "Bulletin of Mordovia", at the last International Military Technical Forum "Army-2017" the Main Missile and Artillery Directorate of the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation presented a 82-mm self-propelled mortar 2S41 "Drok" as a model. A slightly modified version of this self-propelled gun could also be seen on the stand of the UVZ corporation in Rostekha pavilion.

    If Rostehovskaya model, painted in the "branded Nizhny Tagil camouflage", was accompanied only by a brief designation of the type of machine, then the representatives of the GRAU told quite in detail about this interesting machine.

    So, according to the description, R & D "Sketch" provides for the creation of samples of highly mobile artillery and mortar armament on an automobile and two-link caterpillar chassis.

    82-mm self-propelled (carried-wear) mortar 2S41 "Drok" is intended for artillery (mortar) batteries of battalion artillery of motorized rifle, assault and assault and mountain battalions. With its help will be amazed at the goals that are in the zone of responsibility of the battalion.

    The minimum firing range is -100 m.
    The maximum range of fire is 6000 m.
    Rate of fire, without restoration of the tip -12 rds / min.
    Carrying ammunition - 40 min.
    Crew - 4 people.
    Weight - 14 tons.
    2С41 "Дрок" possesses the raised characteristics of accuracy.
    The self-propelled mortar is made on the basis of the armored car "Typhoon VDV" K-4386.

    At the GRAU stand the model of the machine has machine-gun armament placed on the tower, in the UVZ exposition there is a variant where the machine gun is mounted separately, in a special remote-controlled module.

    Also on the roof of the armored car there are special sensors of the optic-electronic countermeasures complex and the number of smoke grenades on the tower is increased.

    On the bmpd side, we will point out that according to the materials posted by the Central Research Institute Burevestnik JSC in 2016 on the website of state purchases, a component of the Rough Outline is the R & D "Sketch-Drok-KSh" - the modification of the chassis K-4386 ( "Typhoon-VDV") for the 82mm self-propelled (portable-carrying) mortar. The design itself is carried out by the Central Research Institute "Burevestnik" under the state contract No. N / 3/3 / 244-2015-DGOZ dated August 7, 2015, identifier 1518187320992010120001466. The 2S41 prototype was to be submitted by December 31, 2016, Be held before February 1, 2018, state tests - until September 30, 2018.






    http://bmpd.livejournal.com/2815690.html


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

    avatar
    eehnie

    Posts : 1552
    Points : 1577
    Join date : 2015-05-13

    Re: New Airborne SP Artilliery Systems

    Post  eehnie on Tue Aug 29, 2017 9:04 am

    2S41, interesting, we have still to know the 2S37 and 2S39. One of them maybe the new Sprut SDM-1 on the BMD-4M platform.

    About the 2S41, not sure if it will pass the tests. Both the weapon and the platform can be too light for the current standards of the Russian Armed Forces, plus. with a mortar of 82mm the 2S41 only can fight inside the range of the man-portable weapons of the adversary, something that would make this artillery wehicle far mor vulnerable than others.

    I would say this option can be also to export.

    Between the 2S41 and the 2S42, for me the 2S42 is the clear winner. I would order only 2S42.
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16741
    Points : 17349
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: New Airborne SP Artilliery Systems

    Post  GarryB on Tue Aug 29, 2017 1:11 pm

    In many situations where the enemy does not have a lot of ATGMs, or speed is more important having an 82mm gun/mortar means the vehicle can be lighter and faster and have better off road performance.

    For light recon units where all vehciles will be light four and six wheeled vehicles (ie typhoon) in the 10-18 ton weight range class this 82mm mortar armed vehicle makes more sense than a much heavier 120mm armed vehicle.

    The Russian military will have a huge range of tasks ahead of it... a small light fast very well armed vehicle like this would be a very potent system behind enemy lines... it will be operating with lots of other vehicles that have missiles and 30mm cannon and other weapons, so it will not be operating alone.

    The shells it fires will be in the 4-6kg weight range so we are talking about quite a potent weapon out to 6km... which also means outside the range of most modern ATGMs too.

    Only Kornet-EM and a few other systems can reach further than that very easily.


    _________________
    “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 : 1552
    Points : 1577
    Join date : 2015-05-13

    Re: New Airborne SP Artilliery Systems

    Post  eehnie on Wed Aug 30, 2017 6:44 am

    Which adversaries of Russia do you expect to have not man-portable antitank weapons? No-one. No-one serious enough to dominate some land, and no-one serious enough to need the use of artillery against. Except in some internal security situation, and I do not think the use of artillery is necessary there, all the potential adversaries of Russia in the future will have man-portable antitank weapons provided happily by the US.

    Also with the increasing use of UAVs and land unmanned vehicles, your view about the land reconnaisance seems fairly obsolete to me.

    Light units. Well I have doubts about a vehicle like the Typhoon VDV 4x4 passing the tests. I have doubts about its armour. I would likely take only vehicles based on the Typhoons 6x6, and BMD-4M platforms. And the 2S42 seems fairly better for me because of:

    - Proved resistance of the BMD-4M platform to air drop.
    - Better armoured platform.
    - Longer range that allows the 2S42 to fight out of the range of the man-portable weapons of the adversary, when is not necessary to go inside.
    - More powerful weapon. I do not consider in any case a 120mm mortar overkill.

    For me it would be easy to decide. And I have to remember that not all the artillery pieces with 2S?? designation reach the active service in the Russian Armed Forces. In fact most of them do not reach it. If you want I can begin to cite the previous unsuccessful cases.

    T-47

    Posts : 211
    Points : 215
    Join date : 2017-07-17
    Location : Planet Earth

    Re: New Airborne SP Artilliery Systems

    Post  T-47 on Wed Aug 30, 2017 11:17 am

    eehnie wrote:Which adversaries of Russia do you expect to have not man-portable antitank weapons? No-one. No-one serious enough to dominate some land, and no-one serious enough to need the use of artillery against. Except in some internal security situation, and I do not think the use of artillery is necessary there, all the potential adversaries of Russia in the future will have man-portable antitank weapons provided happily by the US.

    100% agree. There might be exceptions, but that'll be 1 in 1000 conflicts.

    Also with the increasing use of UAVs and land unmanned vehicles, your view about the land reconnaisance seems fairly obsolete to me.

    Agree with this too. It is still not completely obsolete but will be soon.

    Light units. Well I have doubts about a vehicle like the Typhoon VDV 4x4 passing the tests. I have doubts about its armour. I would likely take only vehicles based on the Typhoons 6x6, and BMD-4M platforms. And the 2S42 seems fairly better for me because of:

    - Proved resistance of the BMD-4M platform to air drop.
    - Better armoured platform.
    - Longer range that allows the 2S42 to fight out of the range of the man-portable weapons of the adversary, when is not necessary to go inside.
    - More powerful weapon. I do not consider in any case a 120mm mortar overkill.

    For me it would be easy to decide. And I have to remember that not all the artillery pieces with 2S?? designation reach the active service in the Russian Armed Forces. In fact most of them do not reach it. If you want I can begin to cite the previous unsuccessful cases.

    Just my opinion: I would leave the 4x4 to the Tigr series for light armored section. It has all the potential of Typhoon VDV with being A LOT cheaper and proven system. Pretty sure it can be customized enough for air drop operation, which is already stated by GAZ.
    While all 6x6 Typhoon-U being the general MRAP for ground forces and Typhoon-K is for special forces. And for BMD-4M eehnie already wrote them.

    For 82mm mortars I think they should be put into light infantry units but in less numbers than 120mm. More focused on border guards than regular army. Also for self-propelled option rather than putting it on an SUV I'd put it on an 6x6 ATV. It was shown in ARMY-2015 if I recalled correctly. It wasn't fully automatic but I'm sure it can be made one. Automatic targeting but manual reload.
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16741
    Points : 17349
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: New Airborne SP Artilliery Systems

    Post  GarryB on Wed Aug 30, 2017 12:18 pm

    Except in some internal security situation, and I do not think the use of artillery is necessary there, all the potential adversaries of Russia in the future will have man-portable antitank weapons provided happily by the US.

    You are right.... Russia should cancel all armoured vehicle development and not make any tanks or armoured vehicles any more because any tank can be penetrated by ATGM.

    Of course the VDV should be disbanded because any vehicle light enough to be air delivered could not possibly be protected from any ATGM threat...

    Get rid of aircraft too because MANPADS have rendered them useless too.

    Also with the increasing use of UAVs and land unmanned vehicles, your view about the land reconnaisance seems fairly obsolete to me.

    So you want to replace recon units with UAVs and unmanned land vehicles... what happens when the ATGMs destroy all the unmanned land vehicles and the UAVs are shot down?

    Light units. Well I have doubts about a vehicle like the Typhoon VDV 4x4 passing the tests. I have doubts about its armour. I would likely take only vehicles based on the Typhoons 6x6, and BMD-4M platforms. And the 2S42 seems fairly better for me because of:

    - Proved resistance of the BMD-4M platform to air drop.
    - Better armoured platform.
    - Longer range that allows the 2S42 to fight out of the range of the man-portable weapons of the adversary, when is not necessary to go inside.
    - More powerful weapon. I do not consider in any case a 120mm mortar overkill.

    For me it would be easy to decide. And I have to remember that not all the artillery pieces with 2S?? designation reach the active service in the Russian Armed Forces. In fact most of them do not reach it. If you want I can begin to cite the previous unsuccessful cases.

    Count the number of times you used the words I and me in the above quote...

    Might come as a shock but the VDV are a recon and attack force and I rather doubt they want to become an unmanned force.

    Those manned forces need armoured vehicles and in this case they want a light weapon mounted on a fast platform.



    _________________
    “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 : 1552
    Points : 1577
    Join date : 2015-05-13

    Re: New Airborne SP Artilliery Systems

    Post  eehnie on Wed Aug 30, 2017 2:14 pm


    The 2S42 is fairly new, you can try to ignore the reality but is a fairly superior weapon to the 2S41.

    The Airborne Troops use the UAVs and the ULVs the right way. There is not a problem with them. Only your views are outdated, and it becomes a problem when we are talking about warfare that can remain 50 years since now in the Russian Armed Forces.

    And no, there is not a reason to avoid the use of armoured vehicles and aircrafts because of the existance of MANPATS and MANPADS. Today, with the apparition of Rocket Assisted Projectiles, all the armoured vehicles and aircrafts present in the Russian Armed Forces can be able to work from outside the range of the man portable weapons of the adversary, unlike the 2S41 that never will be able to do the same.
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16741
    Points : 17349
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: New Airborne SP Artilliery Systems

    Post  GarryB on Fri Sep 01, 2017 6:23 am

    Your biggest failing is you are paper focused...

    Just because something is bigger or more powerful does not make it the natural choice or replacement option.

    A carbine rifle is much more accurate and powerful than any pistol... for a front line police officer however a pistol is vastly more convenient to carry and use even if it has terrible range and power in comparison.

    It does not matter that the 120mm calibre is more powerful and has better range than an 82mm weapon.

    Just the same as with the ZU-23 towed weapon discussion we had... sometimes the on paper better self propelled model seems an obvious replacement option it ignores other factors... including cost and mobility.

    The 120mm calibre system is of course going to be a useful replacement for the NONA system, but that does not mean a lighter 82mm system on a smaller lighter vehicle is out of the question.

    You are correct when you say not everything developed is accepted into service, but they don't just develop things at random... there are specific requirements for each design and not all of them are satisfied simply by putting a slightly bigger gun on it.

    The 30mm cannon is potentially replaceable in many roles because it has become obsolete in many roles...

    In the IFV role against armour is it obsolete because potential enemy IFVS are not really vulnerable to 30mm armour piercing rounds any more.

    In the AA role the 30mm is still effective against manned aircraft but not so effective against small UAVs.

    Air burst rounds would improve their performance against such targets but the 57mm calibre rounds will be rather more effective because of their heavier payload and the fact that some of their rounds will be guided.

    That does not mean the 30mm is obsolete for the APC role (as seen on the BTR-80A type vehicles now), but in that role it is mostly used to deliver HE payloads to targets... a 40mm or 57mm grenade launcher or a 23mm cannon using the lighter medium velocity 23 x 115mm rounds would be much cheaper and hold more ready to use rounds... much less recoil and smaller lighter systems.

    With modern FCS it should be just as accurate if not more so because of the low recoil and high rate of fire.

    And no, there is not a reason to avoid the use of armoured vehicles and aircrafts because of the existance of MANPATS and MANPADS. Today, with the apparition of Rocket Assisted Projectiles, all the armoured vehicles and aircrafts present in the Russian Armed Forces can be able to work from outside the range of the man portable weapons of the adversary, unlike the 2S41 that never will be able to do the same.

    In a modern combat situation unless you are operating in a totally flat desert will have plenty of scope for dead ground... ie places to hide where from the targets perspective you are not visible.

    Lock on after launch weapons will be able to be fired from behind cover so you will never see the platform that fired the weapon.

    To turn it around and talk about Russian systems the laser target marker on the MiG-35 has a range of 20km against ground targets... a radio call to ground forces and a mortar team less than 2km from an Abrams could fire a single laser guided mortar bomb at it and the Abrams crew might have a small hill between them and the mortar team, yet the MiG-35 can detect that Abrams and pass on its coordinates to that mortar team... they know their own position and can calculate the angle and elevation they need to get their round within 500m of the target... they can fire one round and then move. The MiG-35 pilot will get a signal when they fire their round and 4 seconds before impact the Avionics of the MiG will automatically lase the target for the next 5 seconds... the nose cap of the mortar bomb falls off as it starts to fall towards the target Abrams... 3 seconds before impact it will see the laser beam on the roof of the Abrams and it will manouver to hit the top of that Abrams and boom.

    Are you telling me the only way to protect VDV vehicles is to armour them like Abrams and fit them with guns that fire to more than 10km?

    Even in a city you could put that mortar team two streets away and all the buildings will block the view of your crew... even without the laser guidance a mortar can shower rounds on targets less than 500m away without being able to actually see them.

    Missiles like Javelin are fire and forget and it is known the Russians are working on something similar... but I rather suspect much cheaper... so that they become more practical.

    A diving top attack weapon will kill anything no matter what sort of armour you have or what range it was fired from...


    _________________
    “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 : 1552
    Points : 1577
    Join date : 2015-05-13

    Re: New Airborne SP Artilliery Systems

    Post  eehnie on Fri Sep 01, 2017 1:50 pm

    Lots of words to say nothing, GarryB. If you think that to avoid if possible to enter inside the range of the weapons of the adversary is to be paper focused you are full wrong. This is a basic rule to follow for every unit and soldier on the battlefield.

    After all you said, the 2S41 keeps the same weaknesses.
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16741
    Points : 17349
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: New Airborne SP Artilliery Systems

    Post  GarryB on Sun Sep 03, 2017 10:44 am

    Lots of words to say nothing, GarryB. If you think that to avoid if possible to enter inside the range of the weapons of the adversary is to be paper focused you are full wrong. This is a basic rule to follow for every unit and soldier on the battlefield.

    After all you said, the 2S41 keeps the same weaknesses.

    Perhaps if you read what I said and tried to understand what I was trying to say there would be a point in discussing this with you.

    Please list an armoured vehicle in current VDV service that carries a weapon that out ranges this 6km ranged gun and would therefore be safe from enemy ATGMs.

    The M1A2 Abrams can hit targets at 10km with HE shells so it cannot possibly have been destroyed in combat with Konkurs... which has a range of about 4km... which I am sure you will notice is less than the 6km range of this 82mm calibre weapon.

    On a real battlefield there are weapons firing all the time... the launch of an ATGM from more than 2km away is actually rather difficult to notice... even more so inside an armoured vehicle.

    Can you tell me how a 120mm gun with a range of 13km will make the crew of a vehicle safe from ATGMs when the main guns of tanks can hit point targets out to 10km or more with HE shells and we have seen that no ground vehicle is safe from ATGMs?


    _________________
    “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 : 1552
    Points : 1577
    Join date : 2015-05-13

    Re: New Airborne SP Artilliery Systems

    Post  eehnie on Sun Sep 03, 2017 10:47 am

    GarryB wrote:
    Lots of words to say nothing, GarryB. If you think that to avoid if possible to enter inside the range of the weapons of the adversary is to be paper focused you are full wrong. This is a basic rule to follow for every unit and soldier on the battlefield.

    After all you said, the 2S41 keeps the same weaknesses.

    Perhaps if you read what I said and tried to understand what I was trying to say there would be a point in discussing this with you.

    Please list an armoured vehicle in current VDV service that carries a weapon that out ranges this 6km ranged gun and would therefore be safe from enemy ATGMs.

    The M1A2 Abrams can hit targets at 10km with HE shells so it cannot possibly have been destroyed in combat with Konkurs... which has a range of about 4km... which I am sure you will notice is less than the 6km range of this 82mm calibre weapon.

    On a real battlefield there are weapons firing all the time... the launch of an ATGM from more than 2km away is actually rather difficult to notice... even more so inside an armoured vehicle.

    Can you tell me how a 120mm gun with a range of 13km will make the crew of a vehicle safe from ATGMs when the main guns of tanks can hit point targets out to 10km or more with HE shells and we have seen that no ground vehicle is safe from ATGMs?

    2S9.

    With the application of the most modern Rocket Assisted Projectile technologies, the 120mm mortars can reach 17.5 Km of range, like the 2S34 does and like the 2S42 will do (both with the 2A80 weapon). The application of the same technologies to the 125mm caliber would make this caliber outranges the 120mm caliber.

    The 120mm caliber would be in disaddvantage vs the 125mm caliber in the long term, but do not pretend to say that it is the same the range of the 2S42 and the 2S41 of 82mm. You should know that in a war like the war in Syria the 2S42 would be almost untouchable using its range, only a few BM-21, 2S1, D-30 and M-46 in the hands of the rebels would be able to afford its range. The 2S41 instead, would be in constant danger every time it has to fire, being significantly less powerful. This is the difference between both in the real world.
    avatar
    George1

    Posts : 10666
    Points : 11145
    Join date : 2011-12-22
    Location : Greece

    Re: New Airborne SP Artilliery Systems

    Post  George1 on Tue Oct 03, 2017 10:19 am

    Russian airborne troops(VDV) to trail 2S24 Lotos in 2019.

    Lotos is a 120mm SP mortar system on modified BMD-4M chass.



    http://rostec.ru/news/4521284


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

    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16741
    Points : 17349
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: New Airborne SP Artilliery Systems

    Post  GarryB on Wed Oct 04, 2017 9:59 am


    2S9.

    With the application of the most modern Rocket Assisted Projectile technologies, the 120mm mortars can reach 17.5 Km of range, like the 2S34 does and like the 2S42 will do (both with the 2A80 weapon). The application of the same technologies to the 125mm caliber would make this caliber outranges the 120mm caliber.

    So you are saying the 2S9 is safe from ATGMs because it can out range them.

    Amusing.

    BTW the 120mm weapon of the 2S9 has a range of12.5km with a rocket assisted mortar bomb

    BTW in Georges post above the 2S42 has a range of 13km, not 17.5km.

    The 120mm caliber would be in disaddvantage vs the 125mm caliber in the long term, but do not pretend to say that it is the same the range of the 2S42 and the 2S41 of 82mm. You should know that in a war like the war in Syria the 2S42 would be almost untouchable using its range, only a few BM-21, 2S1, D-30 and M-46 in the hands of the rebels would be able to afford its range. The 2S41 instead, would be in constant danger every time it has to fire, being significantly less powerful. This is the difference between both in the real world.

    Range alone means nothing... an IED has a range of less than 500m, yet was used to destroy plenty of targets with more actual range.

    If there are 125mm guns on the battlefield I guess no one would ever fire small arms as a 125mm gun would out range them every time and they would never be able to get within small arms range while one side had 125mm guns.


    _________________
    “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 : 1552
    Points : 1577
    Join date : 2015-05-13

    Re: New Airborne SP Artilliery Systems

    Post  eehnie on Thu Oct 05, 2017 7:07 am

    To ignore the benefit of longer range when it is possible to take advantage of it makes not sense. Not always is used, but it is a good advantage.

    If you check this table, you will see the explatantion to the 13 Km range and to the 17.5 Km range for the 2A80 weapon of the 2S34 and the 2S42:

    https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/2%D0%A11#.D0.A1.D0.B5.D1.80.D0.B8.D0.B9.D0.BD.D0.BE.D0.B5_.D0.BF.D1.80.D0.BE.D0.B8.D0.B7.D0.B2.D0.BE.D0.B4.D1.81.D1.82.D0.B2.D0.BE

    If you want to see the origin of the data you can check the references.
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16741
    Points : 17349
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: New Airborne SP Artilliery Systems

    Post  GarryB on Thu Oct 05, 2017 10:39 am

    Sorry but I don't believe that data table.

    All the sources I have... including from the company that makes the gun and the ammo state that the range of the 120mm gun/mortar as fitted to the 2S9, the 2S23, and the Vena (2S34), is 7.1km with standard mortar bombs, 8.8km with standard HE shells, and 12.5km with a rocket assisted mortar bomb.

    Extra range is useful, of that there is no doubt but being able to out range an enemy does not make you safe from that enemy on anything except the flattest and most open terrain... which rarely exists in the real world.

    Please post the specific link that talks about this shell that can travel over 17km


    _________________
    “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 : 1552
    Points : 1577
    Join date : 2015-05-13

    Re: New Airborne SP Artilliery Systems

    Post  eehnie on Thu Oct 05, 2017 1:48 pm

    Князев М. 2С1 «Гвоздика» // Русские танки. — Киев: Юнивест принт, 2011. — Вып. 32. — С. 4—7. — ISSN 2073-543X

    Do not forget that the weapon of the 2S34 is different of the weapon of the 2S9 and 2S23.
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16741
    Points : 17349
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: New Airborne SP Artilliery Systems

    Post  GarryB on Sat Oct 07, 2017 10:48 pm

    Still not convinced with your basic premise,

    A T-55 can hit targets on the ground with its 100mm rifled gun using HE shells at 8-10 km but it is not safe from ATGMs either.... even 3.75km range TOW.

    BTW that is a link to a book, can you post the actual information that describes these 17.5km range rounds.


    _________________
    “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

    Sponsored content

    Re: New Airborne SP Artilliery Systems

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Sat Nov 25, 2017 3:12 am