2S38 Derivatsiya-PVO 57-mm SPAAG

GarryB wrote:The confusing thing is that the empty shell cases are the same as the S-60 shells of the high velocity gun... I thought this vehicle with no muzzle brake was firing the new 57mm grenade launcher rounds which have stub propellent charges and large projectiles like the 100mm rounds from the 100mm rifled gun on the BMP-3...

GarryB wrote:

These are all the same gun mounted on those turrets... have a close look at the mechanism of the gun where it enters the turret... it is shrouded on the top photo where it has a water cooling system and a muzzle brake but in the lower two images it has the same recoil management system.

A grenade launcher would not have the same recoil management system as a high velocity 57mm gun.

GarryB wrote:

Hole wrote:This seems to be an BMP-3 with the newest incarnation of the AU-220M turret.


57mm gun with muzzle break for Derivatsia-PVO

57mm gun without muzzle break for T-15

57mm grenade launcher

These are all the same gun mounted on those turrets... have a close look at the mechanism of the gun where it enters the turret... it is shrouded on the top photo where it has a water cooling system and a muzzle brake but in the lower two images it has the same recoil management system.

A grenade launcher would not have the same recoil management system as a high velocity 57mm gun.

d_taddei2 wrote:any more info on whats happening to this AA system, i wouldnt have thought it was that a complex system for Russia and could have this developed and into service fairly quickly

Hole wrote:

d_taddei2 wrote:any more info on whats happening to this AA system, i wouldnt have thought it was that a complex system for Russia and could have this developed and into service fairly quickly

Ever heard of something called "testing" and "state acceptance trials"? The russian armed forces don´t accept systems that aren´t tested extensivly. If that means that the trial period lasts a few years so be it. That means that they receive a system that works.

GarryB wrote:I suspect the fact that it is based on a BMP-3 is so they can get it into service if they need it (ie if it works out to be as good as its potential suggests) but can also export it to allies that need serious air defence capability like Syria and Iraq or have lots of money like Saudi Arabia...

The Shilka is still in service so even if they put this vehicle into service now I don't think too much will change immediately... they have a finite budget and lots and lots of new systems on the verge of service entry... I mean SOSNA missiles, and the new Kornet missiles have anti air capability, not to mention drone jammers and new quad pack Pantsir missiles and various active jammers, they really are spoiled for choice...

d_taddei2 wrote:

Hole wrote:

d_taddei2 wrote:any more info on whats happening to this AA system, i wouldnt have thought it was that a complex system for Russia and could have this developed and into service fairly quickly

Ever heard of something called "testing" and "state acceptance trials"? The russian armed forces don´t accept systems that aren´t tested extensivly. If that means that the trial period lasts a few years so be it. That means that they receive a system that works.

of course testing but that isnt that big a deal the chassis is well proven, and they already have experience on the 57mm calibre. no missiles involved. Russia is very capable at putting this into service fairly quickly, new more advanced rounds will likely follow later

GarryB wrote:

of course testing but that isnt that big a deal the chassis is well proven, and they already have experience on the 57mm calibre. no missiles involved. Russia is very capable at putting this into service fairly quickly, new more advanced rounds will likely follow later

I remember when they were introducing the Sgt York they said it should be excellent.... I mean a proven radar (I think it was from an F-18), and the 40mm Bofors gun is well known as an effective AA gun, and I believe the chassis used was an M48 which they had plenty lying around... ideal as it was not too heavy but had good enough armour protection to keep it safe from small arms and light cannon while not being too heavy to drive around the place...

It was a rushed job where they skipped proper development and just used off the shelf proven parts knocked together to get the job done... which sounds sensible... it was terrible...

Ironically it was very much an American ZSU-57-2, but designed and made rather later and never actually entering proper service.

GarryB wrote:

of course testing but that isnt that big a deal the chassis is well proven, and they already have experience on the 57mm calibre. no missiles involved. Russia is very capable at putting this into service fairly quickly, new more advanced rounds will likely follow later

I remember when they were introducing the Sgt York they said it should be excellent.... I mean a proven radar (I think it was from an F-18), and the 40mm Bofors gun is well known as an effective AA gun, and I believe the chassis used was an M48 which they had plenty lying around... ideal as it was not too heavy but had good enough armour protection to keep it safe from small arms and light cannon while not being too heavy to drive around the place...

It was a rushed job where they skipped proper development and just used off the shelf proven parts knocked together to get the job done... which sounds sensible... it was terrible...

Ironically it was very much an American ZSU-57-2, but designed and made rather later and never actually entering proper service.

GarryB wrote:so a naval 57mm gun mount for intercepting anti ship missiles at extended ranges will become useful and no doubt applied to the larger naval calibres which are fully dual use weapons with high accuracy AESA surveillance radars mounted nearby for use against air targets...