Jump to content
Sturgeon's House

General artillery, SPGs, MLRS and long range ATGMs thread.

Recommended Posts

5 hours ago, heretic88 said:

I think 2s35 will be used parallel with Msta-S, not as its replacement. The old Gvozdika, Akatsia, Giatsint will be replaced by them. 

   I was talking about tactical role, rather than physical replacement. We still have T-72AVs running around in some of military districts, after all. :D

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 1.6k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Object 326 SPG (Unofficial name - "Shayba"), was an initiative development by DB. 46 rounds, "double stack" in circular autoloader, crew in hull compartment outside of "turret". The gun, ammunition ra

2S18 Pat-S, an experimental precursor to the 2S31.  Armament was a SA61 152mm howitzer.    

New Japanese 155 mm SPG    

4 hours ago, Beer said:

That's not surprising to be honest. Just to be clear that I read the graphs correct. The three colors represent the type of destroyed object by the threat? I.e. the number 65% means that 65% of destroyed artillery was destroyed by artillery? 

   Yes, you reading it right.

Link to post
Share on other sites

   Mortars are not the only thing that some of Ukrainian military equipment makers can fuck up.



   Wladimir Shchettinin:


   Let me tell you about the fantastic successes of our (Ukrainian) military industry. If you read all kinds of media, then we "caught up and overtook", and then again lagged behind, but on purpose, then again overtake, with a smirk. Type scoff.


   I don’t know for the whole industry, we are working with art[illery], but I suspect that this pattern of behavior is everywhere, in medicine, education. Everywhere. In order to characterize the state of the artillery industry it is not necessary to select words. There is a suitable word. F .... k! [Pizdets!] This is the very capacious word. For those who do not know its meaning, I will try to explain. With photos and even videos.

   To begin, I’ll tell you the latest news, I was shocked. Not the one about Bogdana blowing up its gun breach. There we knew a year ago. And another, 40 year old news. Most recently, dealing with kill mechanics of a fragmentation shell, I read an 1973 American article, unclassified. So, nothing special, tells how it flies, explodes, the types of steel are listed, high-carbon, others, what kind of effect it gives, all sorts of graphics drawn on warm lamp computers.


   So, what am I talking aboutis the glorious nanotechnological Ukrainian shells, analogues that don't exist around the world, with fanfare declared by the Pastor, scatter into 5 large and even 50 pieces of small fragments. Maybe even 100.





   In the photo you see a typical fragment of a Ukrainian shell.
   Of course, plenty of people will run here,  will scream, sho give out military secrets and all that. So ... the secret is kept from citizens of Ukraine, trying to make them idiots who are proud of fake developments.
   I simply will not say anything about the explosive that the shells are stuffed, not because there’s nothing bad to say.


    But the people gave work to Ukrainian sappers, who had to urgently come to the warehouses and disunite the explosive shells. Because HE filler began to swell, like buckwheat, in a pan stuffed to the top.





   Now let's get right to the bottom line. In the second fot you see an inert shell. Well, that does not explode. Extracted from the ground. 


   Look carefully. Do you notice anything? Give up? The catch is that we have right rifling in guns. If you look at the projectile, it rotates clockwise. And the scratches from the ground are as if it had entered the ground, rotating counterclockwise. How can this be? Yes, simple. It entered the ground asshole first. If someone does not fumble at all in artillery, then I’ll open the secret - the shells fly nose forward and ass behind. Asshole flying forward shells currently is unique Ukrainian ammunition, analogues of which doesn't exist in the world.

   Further disclose the meaning of the word P....ts already charit me, to be honest. Then you have to talk about shitmortar, shitBogdana, shitnav and so on. There isn’t enough space on Facebook.




   As a cherry on a pile of manure, I’ll add another short video of firing a new Ukrainian shell at the Goncharovsky firing range. Due to the wildest imbalance, the projectile hit the muzzle brake, a strong blow damaged the muzzle brake, the fuse activated from the impact and after 100 milliseconds, as expected, it worked. At a distance of 80 meters. Providing full diapers of joy to the service staff of the gun. Thank God that fragmentation was about 10 fragments, not 28 thousand, or all we would be corpses.
   That's how we live. From one good news to another.

You might enjoy this.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh lawdy, thats like pre-HE burster effects. Thats fragmentation consistent with 1890s compressed black powder bursters.

At a guess I'd say theres either something terribly wrong with the HE chemistry, mix, or with the pressing. The shell imbalance lends credence to the latter 2 options.

This is the kind of shit the civilized world worked past in 1915, lel.

Link to post
Share on other sites

   The first official recognition of the presence of Iskander-M with nuclear warhead.


   As the press service of the Eastern Military District reported on January 22, 2020, in Buryatia, the troops of the EMD missile units worked out the issues of delivering special ammunition to an area. The main objective of such classes is to work out the coordinated actions of transportation units with the crews of transport-loading machines of Iskander-M complexes for the delivery and transshipment of products, as well as their further shipment to designated areas.


   Comment by bmpd. We are talking about the 103rd separate missile Red Banner Brigade of the Eastern Military District, deployed in Ulan-Ude.

   As far as one can judge, this message is the first official recognition of the presence of nuclear ("special") warheads for the 9K720 Iskander-M combat-tactical missile system.



Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, LoooSeR said:

   Mortars are not the only thing that some of Ukrainian military equipment makers can fuck up.



   More on the subject:


   Director of Thuringismus LLC (03142, Kiev, 4, Vaclav Havel Blvd., office 419) Vladimir Olegovich Shchetinin posted on his Facebook page information about problems when testing domestic 152-mm artillery shells for 2A36 systems ("Hyacinth-B") and 2S5 (" Hyacinth-S ").


   We are talking about testing artillery shells manufactured by the Artem State Chemical Company and the Rubin-2017 LLC.

   Commenting on domestic ammunition, Vladimir Schetinin drew attention to the fact that artillery shells of both manufacturers have a number of differences from the Soviet OF29:

- the shell is assembled from several parts;
- steel grade of the shell body;
- method of equipment with HE filler;
- another type of explosive.


   Since the projectile is assembled from 3 parts, this makes it impossible to shoot for ricochet - when it hits the ground, the projectile will fall apart, fragmentation, moment of inertia also change, which negatively affects the derivation and ballistics of the projectile.


   The steel grade from which it is made differs from the original, which negatively affected the creation of fragments after the detonation of ammunition.  The chief engineer of the company gave figures that after the detonation of Ukrainian shells of both manufacturers, about 100 fragments will form, while the Soviet OF29 - from 1700 to 2000. This is due to the use of low-carbon steel, whose chemical composition gives the material a high impact strength, which causes the formation of a small number of fragments after detonation.

   In addition, the shape of the fragments formed does not meet the necessary standards.


   Also, when testing the product, a number of violations of norms were found:

  • According to GOST, shells with a deviation of more than two weight marks from the norm are not allowed for test firing. Nevertheless, shells were fired with shells with 3 weight marks and even with 4;
  • According to GOST, the weighing of the product is conducted with a fuse installed. Weight for OF29 is 46 kg, while the product of LLC Rubin-2017 weighed 46 kg 600 grams without a fuse. With a fuse B-429, whose weight is 438 grams, an equipped shell weight is 47.038 kg, which corresponds to 4 weight marks (++++);




  • Warm-up shooting was carried out by the Soviet OF29 projectile (reference). For LLC Rubin-2017 at a distance of 8000 meters, the distance between the reference and their product was more than 200 meters; 
  • The exit hole on the shield obtained when checking the safety of cocking the fuse at 60-80 meters showed that the ammunition produced by Rubin-2017 LLC is thrown at an angle;
  • Marks from the rifling of the projectile manufactured by Rubin-2017 LLC showed that the projectile is not centered and unbalanced, as indicated by the previous paragraph;
  • Recoil of the gun during the shot by the product of LLC Rubin-2017 does not comply with the standards.

   Also during the test, the manufacturer LLC Rubin-2017 refused to measure the internal pressure and the moment of inertia of the projectile. The center of gravity of the ammunition was not measured either.



   “After processing the results at the PMZ [Pavlogradsky Mechanical Plant”], fears were voiced that an unbalanced projectile manufactured by Rubin-2017 LLC could hit the gun and explode at the time of the shot. For this, the next test stage was assigned at the Goncharovsky training ground [242nd combined-arms training range of the operational command "North"], "said Shchetinin.


   During tests at the 242nd combined arms range, unbalanced ammunition hit the gun’s muzzle brake, damaging it and exploding in the air. The video from this event was made public by Olga Reshetilova.

   In general, several shells detonated abnormally.


   Regarding the explosive, Vladimir Schetinin added: “The shells are equipped with explosives adapted for such purposes, manufactured by the Pavlograd Chemical Plant [SE Pavlograd Chemical Plant]. This substance is not suitable for long-term storage and increases its volume over time, ” he said.

   Nevertheless, these shells are delivered to the troops and, according to the expert, pose a threat not only during firing, but even during storage.


Link to post
Share on other sites



The Army has picked six companies to work on concepts and designs for an autoloader for the service’s future Extended-Range Cannon Artillery (ERCA) program currently under development, according to a Jan. 24 Army Futures Command statement.

While the first ERCA cannons will be fielded in fiscal 2023, the goal is to begin fielding the system with an autoloader just one year later.

The companies — Actuate (formerly Aegis Systems, Inc.); Apptronik, Inc.; Carnegie Robotics LLC; Pratt & Miller Engineering; Neya Systems, LLC and Hivemapper, Inc. — will work under the Army Capability Accelerator and the Army Applications Laboratory (AAL) as part of the Field Artillery Autonomous Resupply (FAAR) “cohort” and will come up with novel, outside-of-the-box concepts for the autoloader.


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, LoooSeR said:

Bereg SPG and Rubezh AShM

Just wondering... what is the point of the Bereg system today? 23km range is quite miserable, only landing ships may come closer than that, and there are better weapons for destroying those (like the Rubezh). 

But on the other hand... The gun carrier is quite impressive, good gun, rate of fire, fire control and very high offroad mobility for a wheeled vehicle. Why wasnt this adopted for army use? All it would need is an itegration to army command & control systems, and of course better ammunition.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, heretic88 said:

Just wondering... what is the point of the Bereg system today? 23km range is quite miserable, only landing ships may come closer than that, and there are better weapons for destroying those (like the Rubezh). 

But on the other hand... The gun carrier is quite impressive, good gun, rate of fire, and fire control and very high mobility for a wheeled vehicle. Why wasnt this adopted for army use? All it would need is an itegration to army command & control systems, and of course better ammunition.

   Bereg would need Msta-S turret for Army service, or other turret but with 152 mm gun. Bereg is armed with 130 mm gun, Army don't use that caliber.

Link to post
Share on other sites

   Some information about Bereg ("Coast") coastal defense system.


   System consist of 3 vehicle types - SPGs, command post vehicle and "Combat duty support vehicle". On a photo above SPG is on the left and command vehicle with radar and optical-laser rangefiner module deployed is on the right.



   SPG part of Bereg coastal defence system



   Support vehicle



   Command vehicle. Note bigger box above driver cabin (air conditioning) and big ventilation grills between 1st and 2nd wheels, they will allow to tell apart support and command vehicle.




   Upper part of the picture shows command vehicle layout. Vehicle have radar station and FCS for several SPGs. FCS can track 4 targets using radar (35 km max range of detection) and optical system. 2 targets can be actively engaged using command vehicle FCS (SPGs in "slave" mode) by SPGs in the same time.



   Command vehicle (2) can detect targets with radar (or optical-electronic system) or by air recon (5/6) and give fire solutions of 2 targets for SPGs to fire at. Basically, command vehicle provide target detection and information link to other forces, coordinates (incl. automatically) SPG fire against enemies (2 targets in the same time) while keeping eye on 2 more (4 in total can be tracked and FCS can switch fire between any of those 4 in very short amount of time). SPGs have their own FCS, but it can be slaved to CV. It was noted that datalink and target detection system can work in EW enviroment, although it doesn't say more than that.




   So that was system as a whole, now about each vehicle:




   MAK A-222 130 mm SPG of the Bereg costal defense system.


   Gun is 130 mm A-222, range - over 20 km, SPG ammoload is 40 unitary shells. Cannon is mounted in 360 degr. rotatable turret, although for firing main gun 120 degrees sector is allowed as safe arc.  The turret have space for the crew: 4 loaders, gunner and commander. The command post is provided with a control unit for all internal and external systems of SPG and a full range of instruments for guidance, surveillance, firing and communications. 

   The gunner’s position is provided with observation equipment, gun controls, communication and lighting control devices. Two loader positions are located near the feed trays along the gun barrel. The other two loaders are located near the ammorack and ammunition loading device. There are 2 stacks for 40 unitary ammunition in total in the turret. The inner part of the turret has a synthetic coating - to absorb external sound and heat.




   For aiming cannon, an electromechanical system with the following guidance modes is used:

- automatic mode - SPG FCS receive digital data from the command vehicle;
- semi-automatic mode - carried out by the gunner using sighting equipment of SPG vehicle;
Semi-automatic mode is used in case of loss of communication with CV and support vehicles.



   Before firing, self-propelled guns are leveled by 4 jacks, which provide the chassis with the necessary rigidity during combat use. It is possible to move when firing - it will be taken into account by the system of introduced amendments, which includes an optical sensor and roll sensors.




   Each SPG have ballistic computer, commander's optoelectronic sight, gunner's sight and laser rangefinder.




   Command vehicle




   The central post (command vehicle) includes: the BR-136 "Podacha" fire control system with optoelectronic and radar channels for detecting and tracking detected targets, communication and life support equipment. Fire control system provides a predetermined or circular observation of the coastal situation at any time, day or night. FCS can carry out the detection and management of objects with active or passive counter-action.

   FCS features:

- tracking up to 4 targets;
- providing firing solution by any self-propelled guns at 2 targets, both at sea and on land.


   After firing at one of the targets, the BR-136 fire control system can instantly organize firing at the next tracked target. BR-136 calculates parameters of all self-propelled guns according to the motion parameters of the detected objects, using the central aiming mode, the correction system and the assessment of the self-propelled guns range from the central post. SPGs can be located no more than 1 km away from CV.


   All calculations take place automatically, as well as the adjustment of firing. The FCS of Bereg system provides self-propelled guns firing both with single shots and a burst of 4 to 12 rounds/min. The commander observes the combat situation by the azimuth-range indicator, or receives the necessary information from observation points, or from a spotter helicopter. The documentation of firing is automatic.


   The maximum detection range of surface targets by radar is 35 km. The error in determining the full angles is 3 mrd. The time to bring the BR-136 to combat readiness is 3 minutes.

   In case of failure of the central post or BR-136 FCS, each SPG can work independently. 




   The central post itself is divided into 5 compartments:
- the engine compartment, where the diesel-electric emergency power unit and the converter are located to provide power supply to BR-136;
- the antenna post (compartment), where the transceiver equipment of the FCS is located (radar, optical system);
- a high-frequency compartment, which has a special screening from microwave radiation;
- a radio operator compartment, where information processing devices and places for a radio operator and an electric driver were located. The place of the electric driver is equipped with a diesel generator control panel, power supply, life support system;

- an operators compartment in which the seats for the commander of the entire art complex, the commander of the central post, foreman, electrician, and radiometer are equipped. The commander’s position A-222 “Bank” have equipment for navigation, signaling, communications and surveillance. Nearby are made folding tables for working with topographic maps. The commander and foremanof positions are equipped with communication and fire control devices. The places of the electrician and the radiometer are equipped with devices for tracking the detected targets, monitoring and communication.



   Support vehicle:




A combat duty support vehicle consists of:
- a removable power supply unit. It has two diesel-electric stations with insulated neutral, for supplying electricity to the central post;
- fuel tanks for diesel engines with the calculation of continuous operation for a week;
- 2 and 4-seater coupe for relaxation;
- 4-man dining room;
- kitchens with a stock for a week;
- turret machine gun mount 7.62 mm caliber on the roof;
- special equipment for signaling of radiation-chemical weapons use;
- navigation equipment;
- lockers for storing various property of personnel



   2nd vehicle, turret is visible on the roof.






   Contrary to popular belief, coastal gun mounts cannot be replaced by coastal guided missile systems. Guided missiles and artillery systems do not replace each other, but only complement each other. All coastal defense cruise missile systems have dead zones from several kilometers to several tens of kilometers. Missiles are much more affected by active enemy interference, can be shot down by air defense systems of ships. Cruise missiles are ineffective in skerry areas and, finally, they are much more expensive than artillery shells, especially when firing at small-tonnage and landing craft. For example, during the hostilities in Abkhazia, both Georgians and Abkhazians armed small boats and other watercraft, the cost of which is much less than Termit or P-35 missiles.



   Random pictures












Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Similar Content

    • By Beer
      I haven't found an appropriate thread where to put some interesting rare stuff related to WW2 development, be it industrial one or makeshift field modifications. 
      Let's start with two things. The first one is a relatively recently found rarity from Swedish archives - a drawing of ČKD/BMM V8H-Sv tank. The drawing and a letter was found by WoT enthusiasts in Swedish archives in 2014 (the original announcement and the drawing source is here). The drawing is from a message dated 8th September 1941. One of the reasons why this drawing was not known before may be that the Czech archives were partially destroyed by floods in 2002. Anyway it is an export modification of the V-8-H tank accepted into Czechoslovak service as ST vz.39 but never produced due to the cancelation of all orders after Münich 1938 (for the same reason negotiations about licence production in Britain failed). Also later attempt to sell the tank to Romania failed due to BMM being fully busy with Wehrmacht priority orders. The negotiations with Sweden about licence production of V8H-Sv lasted till 1942, at least in May 1942 Swedish commission was present in Prague for negotiations. The tank differed compared to the base ST vz.39 in thicker armor with different front hull shape (armor 60 mm @ 30° on the hull front and also 60 mm on the turret; all sides were 40 mm thick). The tank was heavier (20 tons) and had the LT vz.38 style suspension with probably even larger wheels. The engine was still the same Praga NR V8 (240-250 Hp per source). The armament was unchanged with 47 mm Škoda A11 gun and two vz.37 HMG. The commander's cupola was of the simple small rotating type similar to those used on AH-IV-Sv tankettes. It is known that the Swedes officially asked to arm the tank with 75 mm gun, replace the engine with Volvo V12 and adding third HMG to the back of the turret. In the end the Swedes decided to prefer their own Strv/m42. 

      Source of the drawing
      The second is makeshift field modification found on Balkans. It appears Ustasha forces (and possibly some SS anti-partizan units) used several Italian M15/42 medium tanks with turrets from Pz.38(t). There are several photos of such hybrids but little more is known. On one photo it is possible to see Ustasha registration number U.O. 139.

      Few more photos of such hybrid.
      It appears that the source of all those photos to be found on the internet is this book, Armoured units of the Axis forces in southeastern Europe in WW2 by Dinko Predoevic. 
    • By LoooSeR
      Hello, my friends and Kharkovites, take a sit and be ready for your brains to start to work - we are going to tell you a terrible secret of how to tell apart Soviet tanks that actually works like GLORIOUS T-80 and The Mighty T-72 from Kharkovites attempt to make a tank - the T-64. Many of capitalists Westerners have hard time understanding what tank is in front of them, even when they know smart words like "Kontakt-5" ERA. Ignoramus westerners!
         Because you are all were raised in several hundreds years old capitalism system all of you are blind consumer dummies, that need big noisy labels and shiny colorful things to be attached to product X to be sold to your ignorant heads and wallets, thats why we will need to start with basics. BASICS, DA? First - how to identify to which tank "family" particular MBT belongs to - to T-64 tree, or T-72 line, or Superior T-80 development project, vehicles that don't have big APPLE logo on them for you to understand what is in front of you. And how you can do it in your home without access to your local commie tank nerd? 
         Easy! Use this Putin approved guide "How to tell appart different families of Soviet and Russian tanks from each other using simple and easy to spot external features in 4 steps: a guide for ignorant western journalists and chairborn generals to not suck in their in-depth discussions on the Internet".
      Chapter 1: Where to look, what to see.
      T-64 - The Ugly Kharkovite tank that doesn't work 
         We will begin with T-64, a Kharkovite attempt to make a tank, which was so successful that Ural started to work on their replacement for T-64 known as T-72. Forget about different models of T-64, let's see what is similar between all of them.

      T-72 - the Mighty weapon of Workers and Peasants to smash westerners
         Unlike tank look-alike, made by Kharkovites mad mans, T-72 is true combat tank to fight with forces of evil like radical moderate barbarians and westerners. Thats why we need to learn how identify it from T-64 and you should remember it's frightening lines!

      The GLORIOUS T-80 - a Weapon to Destroy and Conquer bourgeois countries and shatter westerners army
         And now we are looking at the Pride of Party and Soviet army, a true tank to spearhead attacks on decadent westerners, a tank that will destroy countries by sucking their military budgets and dispersing their armies in vortex of air, left from high-speed charge by the GLORIOUS T-80!

      The T-80 shooting down jets by hitting them behind the horizont 
    • By LoooSeR
      T-14 ARMATA 
              This thread is about glorious russian MBT T-14, known as "Armada", "T-95", "black eagle", "T-99" and other stupid Western names given to Object 148 (T-14 in some recent documents). Here is number of images connected to that vehicle.

      Official model of unknown "artillery vehicle". Yeah, Putin, we know that this is T-14. Note Gatling gun on turret right side.
      Artist impression of T-14 based on known model, by Fyodor Podporin. 

      T-14 will use Relikt ERA, which is considerable improvement over Kontakt-5 in resisting to tandem HEAT warheads and EFPs.

      Side skirts would be thicker on a real vehicle, i think. Relikt have AFAIK bigger size than Kontakt-5 ERA build-in blocks.

      Whole album with renders: 
      Video of same render from same artist:

            People expect that tank would have turret weapon system like what you see on the BMP-3 "Bakhcha-U" turret - a lot of weapons in one turret for one gunner to work with. T-14 is rumored to be equipped with 30 (or even 57) mm autocannon, 4-6 barrel gatling type MG/HMG, new 125 (2A82) or even 152 mm (2A83) smoothbore cannons. Turret is unmanned, crew of 3 would be located in frontal part of hull, behind very serious frontal armor inside of compartment, well protected from all directions. Cannon would be loaded by new autoloading device. I hope that Burevestnik is working on them, those guys managed to make 100 mm Naval gun with RoF of 300 shots per minute.
            I really like how turret looks, but i don't understand why there is such a big turret "busket" for unmanned turret with all ammo placed inside of hull in special armored housing. Also, i don't see gunner sight and proposed FSC radar on 3D model (i assume that panoramic sight is for commander). Laser sensors on 3D model are from T-90A variant of "Shtora".
            Some officials mentioned works on new active protection system, that consist of powerfull radar station, that can work on "long ranges" and engage incoming projectiles (missiles) with that gatling MG. Will this system survive development stage and be presented on serial tanks is unknown. Although turret for T-15 Armata-based IFV already was shown with new APS "Afganit".
            If you pay attention you may see that artist used T-80 rollers for Armata chassis, and this is not a mistake - according to some sources Armata heavy chassis will use T-80 or T-80-like rollers to save weight. And looking at rear part of that tank you may notice a engine deck from gas-turbine equipped version of the T-80, which can be mistake becuase MoD want Armata with new ~1500 HP diesel engine. 
    • By CrashbotUS
      I'm doing some research on cold war era Soviet artillery doctrine and was wondering if anyone had any actual Soviet resources. No need for translations, I can read Russian. 
      Right now I have the FM 100-2.1 The Soviet Army:Operations and Tactics from my Army days and some NATO books that really only talk about what we knew from "observational reports". 
      I also have some Soviet artillery survivabilty manuals and Soviet artillery order of battle data but I'm have some trouble with actual artillery unit manuals and the like. 
      Anyone have a good source? 

  • Create New...