Russian Gun Artillery: Discussion Thread

3BV3 weighed 53 kilograms, had a length of 774 millimeters and a diameter of 152.4 millimeters. The power of the nuclear charge was 2.5 kilotons in TNT equivalent, and the range of the aimed shot was about 17.4 kilometers. It is not difficult to imagine what destruction an artillery division armed with such projectiles could inflict with a single salvo. However, in the early 1990s, both the Soviet Union and the United States eliminated artillery nuclear weapons.

LMFS wrote:"High-precision complexes" completed the delivery of artillery control systems for GOZ-2020

Alexander Denisov, General Director of High-Precision Complexes, told TASS that the use of artillery fire control systems 1В181 and 1В198 dramatically increases the effectiveness of artillery units on the battlefield

MOSCOW, December 11. / TASS /. VNII "Signal" (part of the holding "High-precision complexes" of the State Corporation "Rostec") within the framework of the state defense order in 2020 (GOZ-2020) has completed the shipment of automated fire control systems for artillery units 1В181 and 1В198. The press service of High-Precision Complexes informed the journalists about it.

"The shipment was made in full and on time. The contract is long-term, we plan to continue working according to the delivery schedule," the press service quoted the words of the Director General of VNII "Signal", chairman of the Vladimir regional branch of the Russian Engineering Union Vladimir Pimenov.

Alexander Denisov, General Director of High-Precision Complexes, told TASS that the use of artillery fire control systems 1В181 and 1В198 dramatically increases the effectiveness of artillery units on the battlefield. "In fact, these systems make it possible to turn conventional cannon artillery into high-precision weapons capable of effectively destroying any types of targets," Denisov said.

According to military experts, the complexes meet the requirements for automation of artillery control and are used for the Msta-S and Msta-B artillery systems, as well as the Tornado-G and Grad multiple launch rocket systems. "Modern means of preparation of fire and new algorithms for solving problems make it possible to increase the accuracy of fire by 25-30%, and guided projectiles of a new generation destroy enemy targets and objects with a probability of 0.98 - 0.99," the High-Precision Complexes noted.

https://tass.ru/armiya-i-opk/10229983

kvs wrote:

This may be a repost.   But I find it rather surprising that the M109 Paladin firing procedure involves so many warm bodies
and has country club pacing.   By contrast, the 2s1 Gvozdika is much more automated and faster.    I am sure that
the 2s35 Koalitsya SV self-propelled howitzer is no less efficient than the Gvozdika.  

The smoke backwash in the Paladin is absurd.  I know that atmospheric conditions can play a role so it is not so easy
to compare, but this looks excessive.   The whole point of having a bore evacuator is to control this problem.  

This video shows how all that money in the west is not resulting in reasonable designs.   Maybe things have gotten
better, but that is not at all likely since the same problems that resulted in such nonsense are likely to be around.
They are not problems of the engineers but of the management.

By contrast, the 2s1 Gvozdika is much more automated and faster. I am sure that
the 2s35 Koalitsya SV self-propelled howitzer is no less efficient than the Gvozdika.

It seems to me that the best way to go is to replace the mortar with the BM-21 that has 3 times the range and 10 times the rate of fire. With smart units we can program the 40 rockets to hit about 10 different targets and have 35-40 km range.
So what’s the benefit of the 120mm mortars?

It’s OK to use in the infantry the 82mm mortar as they can be transfer by foot soldiers, but for mobile units we should use the BM-21.

USA doing experience with 81mm shell that get now to 7 km range, but they will take it in the future to 40km.

I wouldn't be surprised if US steals or borrows that autoloader in the future like how they did with german guns for their tanks.

GarryB wrote:

The benefit of 120mm mortars is that the bombs come down vertically. With lines of trenches the chance of landing inside a trench is rather small but landing within 5 meters of a trench with a delay fuse a mortar bomb will cause a shockwave through the soil that collapses trenches and bunkers and would be VERY effective against troops in trenches.... you could also get up quite a good rate of fire with a modern mortar and you you could fire from out of line of sight.

 The vertical diving is a great advantage of the 120mm shells but you can get it also from rockets, there are several big advantages to the BM-21 “Grad”: 1) 20kg warhead, 2) 20km range, 3) rate of fire of 40 rockets in 20 second, 4) laser guidance, 5) airburst and thermobaric warheads will be for a big advantage of the Grad rockets.

A few airburst bombs would also do a rather good job of getting the enemy into the bottom of those trenches with near miss ground penetrating bombs (they don't go through 10 meters of earth but a meter and a half is enough) filling those trenches in over those troops.

 No doubt, But the rockets will have better penetration and bigger warhead.

It really depends on the target and the situation... rocket artillery is a great way to fill an enormous area with HE and fragments... troops out in the open for instance,  but dug in troops it is not so effective and of course the launch signature of a rocket battery means it can't sit and fire for days like a mortar team could.

 
That’s true, but the launcher has the ability to give hell to the enemy, get out and disappear.  

Also for strong targets Russia has the odd 160mm mortar in mountain units but also 240mm mortars which would be totally devastating against bunkers and trench lines.

I love the 2S4 Tylpan SP
And at the end I can’t see anything that the 120 mm mortar can do that the BM-21 can’t do better.