Military Ground Vehicles of Your Nation [NO FUN] Mark IX

[Allanea]

People have, you know, merged two ZU-23s into a quad-barrel shilka-a-like in the past.

[Allanea]

[I deeply question the usefulness of sacrificing perfectly serviceable ZU-23s for such a purpose.]

[New Dutch Colonies]

[I deeply question the usefulness of sacrificing perfectly serviceable ZU-23s for such a purpose.]

Why mount four ZSU-23s on one platform if you can mount one of them each on four technicals?

[Allanea]

[I deeply question the usefulness of sacrificing perfectly serviceable ZU-23s for such a purpose.]

Why mount four ZSU-23s on one platform if you can mount one of them each on four technicals?

You mean two. Unless you're going to do some complex thing cutting the gun in half or something.

[Autonomous Eastern Ukraine]

Well the idea (now that I've given it some actual thought) is to make a domestically produced replacement for the shilka (hence why they don't just use the Pantsir).

If you're trying to produce a not-Shilka, as "autonomous east Ukraine", then I don't understand the 6-30 as a starting point. I can't imagine those being easy to come by. Surely the easiest thing to come by would be 30mm autocannons in single or dual-barrel mounts, and combine them into a gunnery platform. It will be less Shilka, and more ZSU-57, really.

Really it started as a dumb idea (Eastern version of the GAU-8 tank) I had late at night. Plus the GSh-6-30 was mounted on the Mig 27 (which OTL Ukraine still has in storage) so it could conceivably be taken from those.
Though Crookfur said the GSh-30-2K would work better it's unfortunately made in Russia.
In hindsight this concept is getting less and less feasible.

[Imperializt Russia]

the 30-2K, if it's what I think it is, should be very easy to come by. Yes, it's Russian-built, but so is half the Ukrainian army.

[New Dutch Colonies]

Why mount four ZSU-23s on one platform if you can mount one of them each on four technicals?

You mean two. Unless you're going to do some complex thing cutting the gun in half or something.

Well yeah, I was referring to four pairs, not dismantling the gun to two individual barrels.

Anyhow, I still get a hard on for technicals. Paint an American eagle on it, tighten a pole with the American flag on the rooftop of your pickup truck and you got a Technical Freedom.

[Questers]

[I deeply question the usefulness of sacrificing perfectly serviceable ZU-23s for such a purpose.]

Why mount four ZSU-23s on one platform if you can mount one of them each on four technicals?

?

You mean why maintain one vehicle and one weapons system instead of four (including four radar systems)? Why have a crew of four instead of sixteen? Why have a tracked vehicle and not four wheeled vehicles?

[Autonomous Eastern Ukraine]

the 30-2K, if it's what I think it is, should be very easy to come by. Yes, it's Russian-built, but so is half the Ukrainian army.

You're right . It's used on the SU-25 for example.
As for a name for this theoretical SPAAG I was thinking ZSK-30-2 (ZSK being zenitna samokhidna kriplennya, which is the Russian ZSU translated to Ukrainian).

[Imperializt Russia]

You mean two. Unless you're going to do some complex thing cutting the gun in half or something.

Well yeah, I was referring to four pairs, not dismantling the gun to two individual barrels.

Anyhow, I still get a hard on for technicals. Paint an American eagle on it, tighten a pole with the American flag on the rooftop of your pickup truck and you got a Technical Freedom.

Why four pairs? That would be eight guns. It would take four ZUs out of commission and not even produce two ZSUs to replace them. For most purposes (see BTR-D), one ZU per vehicle; two guns; would be entirely sufficient for an ad-hoc air defence system.

[Hurtful Thoughts]

Why mount four ZSU-23s on one platform if you can mount one of them each on four technicals?

?

You mean why maintain one vehicle and one weapons system instead of four (including four radar systems)? Why have a crew of four instead of sixteen? Why have a tracked vehicle and not four wheeled vehicles?

Why not have a Karl Gustav with an attached assault-spotting-rifle instead of two seprate guns?

*Duct-tapes an AK-74M to an RPG-29 tube*

Efficiency!

However, ability to disperse and concentrate firepower at will, engage multiple simultanious fleeting targets, and with redundancy to back-up attrition when CAS get angreh with groundies is not a small consideration.

[Laritaia]

?

You mean why maintain one vehicle and one weapons system instead of four (including four radar systems)? Why have a crew of four instead of sixteen? Why have a tracked vehicle and not four wheeled vehicles?

Why not have a Karl Gustav with an attached assault-spotting-rifle instead of two seprate guns?

*Duct-tapes an AK-74M to an RPG-29 tube*

Efficiency!

However, ability to disperse and concentrate firepower at will, engage multiple simultanious fleeting targets, and with redundancy to back-up attrition when CAS get angreh with groundies is not a small consideration.

what if i told you everything you ever dreamed of came in a...

...Rocket Can!!!!!!

[Free Asian Ports]

?

You mean why maintain one vehicle and one weapons system instead of four (including four radar systems)? Why have a crew of four instead of sixteen? Why have a tracked vehicle and not four wheeled vehicles?

Why not have a Karl Gustav with an attached assault-spotting-rifle instead of two seprate guns?

*Duct-tapes an AK-74M to an RPG-29 tube*

Efficiency!

However, ability to disperse and concentrate firepower at will, engage multiple simultanious fleeting targets, and with redundancy to back-up attrition when CAS get angreh with groundies is not a small consideration.

Build moar ZSU-23-4s

Or, alternatively, build your SPAAG to be good enough to not really worry enough about PO'd CAS to require even more units

Personally, I'd choose the former

[The Wyoming Peoples Front]

What do you call it when the ZPU mounted to your pickup gets dirty from too much dakka?

[Allanea]

Why mount four ZSU-23s on one platform if you can mount one of them each on four technicals?

?

You mean why maintain one vehicle and one weapons system instead of four (including four radar systems)? Why have a crew of four instead of sixteen? Why have a tracked vehicle and not four wheeled vehicles?

Zu-23s don't have radar at all. They don't really even have anti-air sights as standards and are only capable of 'blocking fire' as AA weapons. (Except in the latest upgrade modifications where they have AA sights and RADAR coupling and coaxial MANPADs).

So when we were talkin about making a proto-shilka out of ZU-23s, I was assuming it was like the Middle-Eastern contraptions that do this - to shoot up ground targets.

[Yes, people actually do this.]

[Hrstrovokia]

If you were to include a Mortar battery with a Mech Inf Battalion, which would be better? (assuming you are Russian/Sovet tech based)

2S31 Vena 120mm Mortar

Amphibious
Main gun: 120-mm gun/mortar
Machine guns: 1 x 7.62-mm
Projectile weight: 17.3 kg
Maximum firing range: 7.2 - 13 km
Maximum rate of fire : 8 - 10 rpm
Elevation range: - 4 to + 80 degrees
Traverse range: 360 degrees

or

S24 Tyulpan 240mm Mortar

Fording: 1m
Main gun: 240-mm mortar
Machine guns: 1 x 7.62-mm
Projectile weight: 130 kg
Maximum firing range: 9.6 / 19 km
Maximum rate of fire : 1 rpm
Elevation range: + 50 to + 80 degrees
Traverse range: 20 - 82 degrees

Tyulpan has superior armament but only 1 rpm and traverse and elevation aren't great.

[Purpelia]

The 2S4 is not a mortar. It's a siege weapon. The thing is basically the modern equivalent of a trebuchet. It's purpose is to shove big nasty wads of HE down any fortified building, bunker or mountain hideout your enemy might have at a rate of 1 shot per minute.

[Gallia-]

So it's a mortar?

[Hrstrovokia]

The 2S4 is not a mortar. It's a siege weapon. The thing is basically the modern equivalent of a trebuchet. It's purpose is to shove big nasty wads of HE down any fortified building, bunker or mountain hideout your enemy might have at a rate of 1 shot per minute.

Ah I see. So good for siege, not good for supporting fast moving formations and providing quick fire support?

[Purpelia]

The 2S4 is not a mortar. It's a siege weapon. The thing is basically the modern equivalent of a trebuchet. It's purpose is to shove big nasty wads of HE down any fortified building, bunker or mountain hideout your enemy might have at a rate of 1 shot per minute.

Ah I see. So good for siege, not good for supporting fast moving formations and providing quick fire support?

My advice for you would be to go read up on how mortars are used and what they are for. That will explain everything.

[Imperializt Russia]

The 2S4 is not a mortar. It's a siege weapon. The thing is basically the modern equivalent of a trebuchet. It's purpose is to shove big nasty wads of HE down any fortified building, bunker or mountain hideout your enemy might have at a rate of 1 shot per minute.

Basically this. Tyulpan is not the tactical weapon of a battalion.

It is a very high-level asset with a very limited set of appropriate targets.
The Vena has a good rate of fire and weight of fire, and good response time, and is highly appropriate for battalion-level operations; certainly regimental.

[Gallia-]

The 2S4 is not a mortar. It's a siege weapon. The thing is basically the modern equivalent of a trebuchet. It's purpose is to shove big nasty wads of HE down any fortified building, bunker or mountain hideout your enemy might have at a rate of 1 shot per minute.

Ah I see. So good for siege, not good for supporting fast moving formations and providing quick fire support?

It's very fast and very good for supporting fast moving formations.

It's why it's self-propelled and has a big shell.

Big shell = less shells to harass/neutralize/destroy a target according to norms = less time to harass/neutralize/destroy whatever.

The Soviet Army was a very fast action army in the 1970s.

Tuliptree lived in Soviet Armies, which were equivalent to a NATO Corps, in units called "артиллерийская бригада большой мощности" (which I can only assume translates to something like "heavy artillery brigade") which also operated the 2S7 Pion, and would have operated the Soviet Big Guns of WW2 like the B-4.

It would be used for general support, and direct support of maneuver battalions, regiments, and divisions when their organic 2S1s, 2S3s, and D-30s were insufficient to crack the Maginot Line's 1930s concrete or something, and it even had laser guided shells like Smel'chak for direct support guided by a ground laser team.

[Allanea]

Big shell = less shells to harass/neutralize/destroy a target according to norms = less time to harass/neutralize/destroy whatever.

The relationship is not fully linear but you surely know that.

To take a rash example, a Soviet 82mm mortar requires 95 shells to suppress a a hectare's worth of infantry. A Vasilek automatic mortar has a listed practical rate of fire of 100-120 rounds per minute. Their total weight is about 200 kilograms.

15 240mm mortar shells are required to suppress the same area, which it will fire in 15 minutes. Their total weight is north of 1.6 tons.


But there are obviously things that an 82mm or 120mm mortar cannot meaningfully harm at all.

[Gallia-]

I also think that big mortars are the eighth deadly sin TBF.

[Allanea]

I also think that big mortars are the eighth deadly sin TBF.

Well I am a Satanist so...