Russian 2S38 'Derivaciya' PVO 57mm Self-Propelled Anti-Aircraft Gun
Вставка
- Опубліковано 28 вер 2024
- Video Sponsored by Ridge Wallet:
www.ridge.com/...
Use Code “WALLETSIMUS ” for 10% off your order
The 2S38 Derivaciya PVO is a new Russian Self-Propelled Anti-Aircraft Gun (SPAAG). It was designed as a concept or technology demonstrator. It could be a possible replacement for a 2S6 Tunguska air defense gun/missile system, that was adopted back in the early 1980s. By 2020 a couple of units of the new system were completed.
This new mobile air defense system was designed to engage low-flying aircraft, helicopters, UAVs, cruise missiles, air-to-ground missiles. It can even engage single large-caliber artillery rockets. The 2S38 combat vehicle was designed to operate as a part of a larger system, that includes various support vehicles.
The 2S38 combat vehicle is based on a BMP-3 infantry fighting vehicle chassis. It is fitted with a remotely-controlled weapon station, armed with a single 57 mm cannon. Such arrangement is rather unusual for a vehicle of this class.
The 2S38 can engage targets traveling at a maximum speed of 1 800 km/h. It is also effective against ground targets, vehicles, and infantry holed-up in buildings and field fortifications. Its 57 mm ammunition is much more lethal than that 30 mm rounds of the 2S6 Tunguska or 23 mm rounds of the ageing ZSU-23-4 Shilka. This 57 mm cannon will easily defeat most modern armored personnel carriers, infantry fighting vehicles, self-propelled artillery systems and other armored vehicles. However its ammunition load is rather limited, as only 148 rounds are carried.
There is also a 7.62 mm machine gun. This weapon is mounted externally.
This air defense system has passive detection and tracking systems. It uses its thermal sight rather than radar to detect and track air targets. It can detect A-10 Thunderbolt II ground attack aircraft at ranges of up to 6 400-12 300 m depending on detection mode. Small UAVs, such as IAI Bird Eye 400 are detected at ranges of 700-4 900 m.
Hull and turret of this air defense vehicle are made of welded aluminum alloy armor. The front arc is made of composite armor and provides protection against 30 mm armor-piercing rounds. All-round protection is against 14.5 mm armor-piercing rounds. Protection can be enhanced with add-on explosive reactive armor kit. This armored vehicle is also fitted with NBC protection and automatic fire suppression systems. The 2S38 is also fitted with smoke grenade dischargers. Furthermore it can generate smoke screens by injecting fuel into exhaust.
This air defense vehicle is operated by a crew of 3, including commander, gunner and driver. It seems that this vehicle also has a capability to carry dismounts, as there are entry and exit doors at the rear with hatches. Though accommodation for dismounts inside the original BMP-3 infantry fighting vehicle was rather cramped due to a rear-mounted engine.
The 2S38 is powered by an UTD-29 V-10 diesel engine, developing 500 hp. The engine is mounted at the rear for better weight distribution and improved amphibious capabilities, as the original BMP-3 actually started life as a light tank, but was later repurposed as an infantry fighting vehicle. There is a manual transmission with 4 forward and 2 reverse gears. This armored vehicle has a hydropneumatic suspension, which can be adjusted to suit the type of ground being crossed. The 2S38 is fully amphibious. On water it is propelled by 2 waterjets.
This armored vehicle is fitted with a front-mounted self-entrenching blade and can dig itself a defensive position.
The 2S38 has an associated 9T260 ammunition resupply vehicle. It is based on an Ural-4320 or Ural-63704-0010 military truck with 6x6 configuration. It carries 57 mm rounds for the main gun, as well as cooling liquid for the cannon. It takes 20 minutes to reload the SPAAG. The 9T260 can reload two 2S38 SPAAGs simultaneously.
Hope you enjoy!!
💰 Want to support my channel? Check out my Patreon Donation page! www.patreon.co...
💰PayPal: paypal.me/Mats....
Matt’s DREAM: www.gofundme.c....
👕 Check out my Merch: teespring.com/stores/matsimuss-legion...
📬Wanna send me something? My PO Box: Matthew James 210A - 12A Street N Suite
#135 Lethbridge Alberta Canada T1H2J
📸 My instagram: Matt_matsimus
🎮 Twitch: / matsimus_9033
👋DISCORD: / discord
📘 Facebook: www.facebook.c....
🐦Twitter: / matsimusgaming
Big thanks to Ridge for sending me this wallet and supporting the channel! Here’s the site if you want to check them out! > ridge.com/WALLETSIMUS
It's not. ZSU-57-2 was a dedicated SPAAG. This thing however exists for the same purpose US is started producing 50mm version of Bushmaster - garbage variety drones cost several times less then AA missile of Tunguska or even Pantsir(system that aimed to produce simplest missile solution specifically). This is still an IFV. Just with extended range, programmable warhead and dedicated "flak" round to counter swarms of those 400$ flying quadcopters with cameras and jury rigged with laser pointers and/or IEDs at twice the range 30-35mm autocannons could.
Russian are also developing guided ammunition for this gun. It's like little laser guided missle, without engine, starting speed - 700m\s
@@Lancetdrone it is pointless though. We have already seen such ammunition on Otomatic and Draco - it is too expensive to use. Good idea, but not for production efficiency of this century:D
@@TheArklyte otomatic have radiocontrol system, it's more expensive, then laser guided system. Also laserguided shells and missles - russian classic weapons. If you have mass production, it will be less cost.
I not sure I quite understand your statement " why make it have any Ground effect at all?/"... that's a very odd thing to say.. What part of Mechanically is added or loss to add that capability ??..( I'm guessing its a software up date ~Yes??... also on the Export market for Defense budgets Less than say 758 Billion dollars.. duel use might have a appeal..correct??
Sadly, I don't think Santa will give me one this year.
Satan might
Santa is in Covid lockdown.
Maybe next year
@@bradleyanderson4315 That or he learned his lesson from the first person he gifted this to. He no longer delivers to that area
You can play it on warthunder now
I do like seeing the Russians design doctrine of reusing old military platforms with newer technologies.
yes, i like it too, as its cheaper a lot. APC type bodies for average platform carring 25/30/40/57mm guns, can be fitted anywhere, even on big trucks. Old T55s and T62s could also be used as platform, as both have thicker armor than BMP3 body. even T72A's
I mean if you have millions of the stuff just sitting around and you want to modernize, just use the stuff you have instead of designing and making new ones with tge same armour values as what you allready have, if it's not broken, don't fix it, just improve on it
Are we calling that a doctrine now? Who doesn't do it? It's the main way countries have increased the effectiveness of their vehicles for the last 80 years.
less tax payer money unlike a certain country that wastes the most >.>
@@nostradamusofgames5508 I think that I might know which one you mean. LOL
It's also too bad that Venezuela doesn't reside next to a certain smaller nation in the middle east. They could really use the help and that smaller one seems to been calling a lot of shots in the past 20 years.
Raytheon (I think it was) recently built a 57mm grenade with integrated electroptics and guidance that can find targets on their own, it was primarily built for naval use against swarms of smaller boats but it shouldn't be impossible to make something similar work against aircraft.
Slap that turret on a BMD and you got a decent support for the 2s25 sprut light tank
A better name for it should be: A10’s worst nightmare
Other way around
@@a1marine105 No !
YOu have TOR and buk for that. This is just a powerful all purpose weapon.
@@a1marine105 the A10 may be scary, yes, but if anything gets its shot off correctly, it'll probably be shredded.
@@a1marine105 no not exactly the A-10’s slow so the proxy will take it out easily
Dear mats, thanks for the video, Derivaciya is spoken de ree wah tsia, its basically word Derivation
The problem with the new round of high capability mid caliber cannon lies in the cost of the "smart" ammo. The Bofors 57mm, for instance, has an "Antipirate" round (no kidding) that has onboard RaDAR for-get this-detecting people so it knows when to detonate. True fax. The PRACTICE rounds for this weapon run 5K USD per. And the weapon has a 180rpm ROF. The AntiPirate munition runs around 100K USD per round. It's a great way to break a national economy, while giving the owner(s) of the weapons firm enough free cash to buy that Dacha on the Georgian steppes.
With that said, if money were no object, I'd buy a dozen. A multifunction, high ROF, autocannon is a military must have.
Think of it as an anti aircraft sniper vs a drone swarm.
Then you're using it wrong
You would have thought they would have used the space at the back for extra ammo.
It's not. ZSU-57-2 was a dedicated SPAAG. This thing however exists for the same purpose US is started producing 50mm version of Bushmaster - garbage variety drones cost several times less then AA missile of Tunguska or even Pantsir(system that aimed to produce simplest missile solution specifically). This is still an IFV.
So its like a mobile 57cal. sniper Anti Aircraft Gun with smart bullet
Nice sponsor pick up. I got given one of these from work last Christmas. Thanks for the vid sir.👍🏼👍🏼
Everything is much simpler, this is air defense for the airborne forces!
I like it because it applies similar thinking to the programmable rounds used on the Bofors 57mm naval gun...
It looks better as an IFV rather than an AA in my opinion. Those rounds probably can shred anything less armoured than an MBT
This seems very similar to 57mm naval guns, like the ones on Canadas own Halifax class Frigates. We KNOW how good those are against missiles and aircraft firing from ships, so this system is smart on the part of the Russians.
great and heavy gun - on a much to light (BMP-3) chassis. While firing, it is wobbling around like crazy. It is is going up and down 10-20 cm - how will you engage a flying target up to 5km + away? The 2S38 'Derivaciya' weighs about 19 tons. In comparison, the German Gepard - with its two 35mm cannons - is nearly 50 tons (on a Leopard chassis) and rock-solid when firing. All of the the Russian AA-tanks have this problem, but e.g the 2S6 Tunguska compensates this problem by spraying bursts up to 250 rounds with a rate of fire of more than 3500 rounds per minute and saturating a whole area with projectils. But with this extreamly slow rate of fire...? It could make sense on a T-80 or T-90 chassis - but this will be far more expansive.....
it probably has some sort of two plane stabilization, you wouldn't have such a mobile spaa without any sort of tech that allows it to exploit that same mobility, it's 2020 lol
@@buscadiamantes1232 2020..lol....? There is not any kind of stabilisation there - the gun is climbing a lot when firing - as it is with the Tunguska, spraying the projectiles all around, even at 1000m. By the way, the Leopard 1 is much more agil an mobil than the BMP-3....so what is the point of yout comment...?
Thats why you have stab
@@okakokakiev787 ...as I said in my second comment, there is not any kind of stabilisation there - the gun/muzzle is climbing a lot when firing - lock at the video again. Same problem with Tunguska and Terminator. Tunguska to solve the problem spraying bursts of up to 250 rounds to hit anything anywhere...
@@heimdalshorn then don't know, I supposed it had some sort of stabilizer because you know, we're in 2021 now (hahaha) and I guessed stabilizers were standard on high precision systems like SPAAs but it seems it's not? perhaps on the video it is not turned on? We shall see if there's any update on that in the upcoming months
This looks like a battalion level SPAAG. Not only it is made to defend against SWARM UAV formations, but also attack enemy urban fortifications.
It will give the Russian Army a true battalion-level AD system, the first since the Shilka, to supplement MANPADs.
I want to see something like it on the next US IFV, paired with hellfire rails
Nice Chanel. A hug from 🇵🇹 Portugal.
Hey Mat what is your view on ramjet shell in artillery.
Oh, the Russians invented a more primitive version of the LVKV, 30 years late.
The number of rounds is plenty for the intended purpose, with programmable ammunition. More and more AA manufacturers are moving away from spray and pray.
The platform is fine. Wouldn't surprise me if the turret was made to be fitted to anything the customer wants, as is the norm nowadays.
The Terminator (ick) is not a competitor in any sense.
the LVKV only has 40mm, if we allow such variation why not include the earlier Italian Otomatic with its 76mm? (from 40 years ago)
@@matthiuskoenig3378 Why not indeed.
I have no particular drive to argue that the LVKV was first, so if you can find an earlier comparable system, go right ahead. The Otomatic was mounted on a tank chassis, though.
I saw a version of it based on Armata platform, it was same turret but that heavy IFV, not Kurganetsk if I remember correctly
t-15, but with battle module AU200M Baikal (57-mm gun)
By the year 2045 russia will have made exactly 6 XD
7 but they will be already designing a replacement
This certainly does seems like an anti-drone system. With smart munitions, good range. And an all around multi purpose piece of kit for everything short of an MBT. Yup.
How is 148 of 57mm rounds a low amount? It is 57mm round, most of ww2 tanks whit 57mm of smaller gun were carring less than that.
3rd is best
Honestly, I wouldn't put it past ministry of defence that BMP base is used because it is cheaper than t90 for terminator. At the end of the day BMP is made from aluminium and only some steel where as t90 is all steel. At this point it also can be just a test for export rather than actual Russian army as primary user
I remember some army that had a trailer towed behind the weapon to carry a ton of ammo! Maybe this could be done?
As russian sources speak, its made only for completing AA like Tunguska and Panzir against drones. Especially after AA disastrous failure in Syria. Turkish drones annihilate them.
My favorite )
Could you do a video about the French ECRB Jaguar and Griffon VBMR?
You can aslo find this system on the South African "Mbombe 8" infantry combat vehicle.
Too bad our guys can't hit shit, was at a live firing presentation, our guys couldn't hit a body sized target 100m in dark if it had a headlamp strapped to its head
Armenia could've done with some of these a couple months ago.
in warthunder its an anti everything cehical
Serbian LAZANSKI has this gun
Can't wait for AA autoloaders getting bigger and bigger until we have an 152mm or a full auto railguns
Manual transmissions are a lot easier to maintain. Given what is happening in Ukraine, this is a substantial capability.
It looks to me like this is designed to provide localized AA protection for infantry formations. Infantry brigades comprised of standard bmp3 would move into combat while this would tag along and provide AA coverage at the company level. The 57mm smart shells would also be amazingly effective against infantry and fortifications which leads me to believe that this isnt actually an AA vehicle in the first place. Rather it is an IFV foremost that has an expanded ability to fight aerial threats. This theory is backed up by the fact it still holds the same number of Infantry in the back as a standard Bmp3. Personally, I think this is the way forward in that IFVs will increasingly be able to pull double duty against aircraft and ground threats. The close proximity to mechanized troops and other Bmp3s would alleviate its ammo problems and prevent logistics burdens because they use the same parts. The low ammo however shouldn't be an issue as most SPAAGs have fast fire rates and relatively low ammo counts ( less than a full minute of firing worth) so a larger 57mm shell with over a full minutes worth of firing in ammo is actually pretty good. The russian government also stated that they believe that most threats would be destroyed within 2-5 rounds.
The 50mm bushmaster from the US is developed because GUIDED AMMUNITION is about to come. there for you need less shots.
Its also not a primary anti aircraft cannon. its a multipurpous cannon. it is designed to give airborn troops support fire with a capable anti aircraft capability. 1000km/h for targets to be hit reliably without guided amunition can defeat most low flying targets like planes bombs missiles or even cruise missiles. allthough less important in a airborne operation.
the 57mm bofor is now beeing equiped with guided ammunition.
supply is paramount. you should know that. with guided munition you need less shots. and if you need to supply anyway its not that big of an issue in my book.
I would make this into a CIWIS with missles. That would be dope
Derivaciya can be easy transport and its faster than terminator, so ground units have something thay can use more than terminator who is more for front line whit t72 armmor
The T-15 armata IFV with this turret will be probably the most impressive IFV on earth for quite some time. Unfortunatelly the Russian will not buy them because of how expensive the thing is, and russian exports are largely determinad by politics, not economy alone.
Russia - making plugs for gaps you didn't even know there was
In terms of war ecomony, all those money usa spent for fleet, russia spent for antiair/missile systems
It's "ground " capable because the Russians know the Terminator is a giant pile of trash. Those big guns can't hit a thing. It's a peacock. Looks cool... but useless
The terminators accuracy is fine. It has multiple settings for fire rate, higher fire rate = less accuracy. I can show you a video of it hitting targets accurately from like 2km away with its cannons if you don’t believe it
Bad as a tank, and bad as an air defense
Good as anti infantry and good anti light armour. Drones good at destroying aswell.
I, the one with the annoying name, have never been this early
57mm is still used on the smaller Russian ships.. also as you point out, this size is about the smallest size in the cost effective 'smart' ammunition (more than jut a proximity, timed and self destruct) ammunition.. and this gun has range and that is critical as the Russian 30mm really is only effected out to 4-5000m and that is only for the softer skinned targets. 57 at that range can't defeat tank armor, but it can destroy a drive sprocket with one shot and that shot can be quite 'smart', almost missile smart... also think Marines.. this is an attack vehicle.. backing up the front line that is moving.. As for the entrenching blade.. I'd also have a low gear on that five speed or even another 3 or 4 gear, box.. but then I like tractors. Bloody Drone Killer..
This needs a 4x ATGM and would be perfect AFV LOL. The gun is fully stabilized and no radar sight made me think it should be able to engage tanks too with fin rounds.
You play to much war thunder
@@photonicemitter9227 you underestimate the potential power of these things, 60mm italian fin rounds from 40 years ago had the penetration of the L7 fin rounds (irl not warthunder), so modern 57/60mm could be even better, and able to defeat all but the most modern and well armoured MBTs at medium ranges (which is all that you would need in urban and forest enviroments) frontally, let alone on the side, and modern MBTs are rare, IFVs and infantry are mutch more common, and 57mm rounds would be very good against both.
@@matthiuskoenig3378 read again my answer. Every word.
well, the A10's armour isnt going to stop that
i don’t think it could stop regular 30mm AA rounds either if directly hit
Matsimus please do a review on Sabrah Light Tank for Philippines
This is basically a bushmaster with 27 extra mm and can point up more right lol
The 57mm projectile follow the trajectory of the cruise missile/drone/jet because a laserpointer marks it and close to the target projectile explode ( air burst)...is that so?..it would be similar to laser guide artillery or aerial bombs vs ground targets but in this system AAA laser guide artillery...
Are we sure it’s not just an 57mm equipment bmp-3? Like is it a transport at all?
В Сирии ВС РФ столкнулись с массовым применением самодельных беспилотников, сделанных на базе квадрокоптеров, сбивать их ракетами дорого, а не сбивать это получить 82 мм мину на голову в прямом смысле слова, эта машина для этого, снаряд дешевле ракеты.
I'm not sure I understand what you mean.. 148 rounds at 3~6 round burst per Target ( of engagement ) means 25 or so targets .. that's quite a lot ..an if working in pairs or three unit squads.. that's a great deal of overlapping firepower.. ( the reloading Truck is a problem But that's just Russian Cheapness of penny wise pound foolish " like British & India ,all three bring Stupid cheap to a whole new level.., Making a BMP 3 ammo transfer version shouldn't take much..
this is the IR guided anti-SEAD weapon
I thought it's a IFV 🤔
Soo this is AA sniper + ground targets
looks super deadly to stationary targets, planes won't even come near it, even russian test uav's steer clear.
Need to pack more ammo into that
Who sais its really AA gun .
The target you saw only land grand targets .. experiences from diferentes conflicts .
This isn't anti aircraft gun they got Panzir ..
The goal is to make like the Swedish CV 90
Same turret is on the new serbian 8x8 Lazanski
dont forget Phalanx and Pivads are old Matt
Another new Russian vehicle that they won't be able to field in large numbers until after its already become obsolete.
It looks more like an Urban Light Tank with AA capabilities to me.
Yes...2 applications in 1 vehicle
just because you capitalized Urban Light Tank doesnt make that an actual vehicle classification. why are you inventing terms and acting like that is a thing?
It's really what it acts like
Military & internet terms don't match half the time, hell I can call an IFV a taxi light tank if I want to
Soviets/Russians tend to made/make multipurpose platforms.
urban and light tank is very deadly for the tank
The successor of ZSU-57-2 right there.
To me it looks like the great grandson of the zut-37, with how the turret is
@@potatojuice5124 that could work too.
ZSU-57 was crap in AA role, though, and so would be this one as well.
@@Mandrak789 Why would it be crap? Other than having the same caliber of cannon, it's a vastly more modern AA system. Moreover as it doesn't use a radar, but rather IR sensors, NATO Aircraft and anti-SAM stealth drones, won't be able to detect it as they would normal AAA systems via their radar signatures. They won't even be able to detect via IR signature easily either if it's using its APU (Auxillary Power Unit) to minimize it's IR signature.
What is not stated in this video is how this system estimates range and the lead for the gun on an approaching aircraft. More than likely it uses a laser for this purpose much like a tank but with its fire-control system designed to calculate lead for much faster moving targets.
One massive advantage of such a system is that it can not be jammed like the radar systems on the Tanguska self propelled AA gun or the older ZSU-23-4 Shilka. I would not be surprised if the Tanguska's are updated to eventually use similar fire control systems.
It also should be presumed that with it's remote turret, that it can be slaved to a central fire control radar system much like modern trailer mounted BOFORS 40mm AA gun systems. On top of that with programmable ammunition, you have what will be an extremely potent AAA system. The sad fact of the matter is that the U.S. does not have ANY AA gun systems that come remotely close. All we have is the M3 linebacker (which as far as I know uses a standard M2 Bradley fire control system that can't track and calculate lead for fast moving targets) and the old Humvee-based Avenger system which has an anemic .50 MG as its AA gun. Both are primarily Stinger SAM launching platforms. The U.S. military puts all it's hope in air supremacy and its Patriot missile defense systems. If Patriot missile battery fire control radars are successfully jammed, aside from short range stingers, the U.S. doesn't really have anything else.
In contrast the Russians have a vast range of long, medium, and short range SAM systems complimented by several types of AA gun systems ranging from the simple but effective manually aimed ZSU-23-2 up to this modern system in the video. It's rather embarrassing to be honest that my country (the U.S.) has fallen so far behind in this area of military defense.
@@wigon its one of Russias main focuses because Russia sees the US air power as its biggest threat. No one can compete with the US air force, so i think they made the smart choice to invest in air defense rather than trying to outdo it. Meanwhile, he US focuses on expeditionary capabilities, because its biggest threat is communist influence on our allies. as long as the US has air superioity, no need for better air defense
Two views, and already 1 dislike!?
Go to your corner, whoever you are!
They must be CIA/MI6 and have all the intelligence on it, and disagree with Matismus's info :P .
Might be a salty "Patriot"
Plot twist : that first dis was from Matsimus himself. Kind of self humble video dislike , y'know.
@@alexisbierquedebirkadefauv1744 hi
That was the Apache pilot who realized his cockpit is armored only against 23mm shells at best.
Rusia, 57mm gun
Italy: hold my bear, proceed to bring out the Otomat
Otomat OP pls nerf.
Mopping up everything on the battlefield in Wargame
it should have been:
Italy: Hold my pizza and pasta, proceed to bring out the Otomat.
Not to be confused with a tomatO
Otomagic > Otomat
Good point.
I remember being fascinated with that system in the early 90s
Great video, some ideas for russian equipment: VDV Sprut SPG, Bereg coastal artillery platform and the MT-LB with its infinite variants.
Bastion and Bal costal defense missile systems.
Never saw some good narrative videos about them.
The Bereg would be great!
I think that russians like to "overlap" capacitites of their various support vehicles. It makes sense ! If one fails, the second can back him !
My guess is that 2S38 is primarly a SPAAG with AT capacities while BMPT is primarly AT with some SPAAG capacities. Nice overlap/complementarity between these two !
Same apply for their missile based AA defenses ! From Strela's to S-400 and all BUK and TOR, nice overlaps of capacities !
They don't want that "grey zone" where no one can fully engage a threat !
Exactly, no grey areas. Like always most see an anti-air system as one. Very wrong, this thing makes a lot sense in an entire air-defense like the Russians have, mostly misunderstood on by You Tubers. Like you exactly sayd, this thing is made to cover grey areas in an complete air-defense, grey new areas, like drones, which means Russians already understood what happened in Syria or Azerbaidjan, drones in every size, but bigger number. A great vehicle, and if only every 3rd hits s drone, thst's over 50 drones, not bad. I think a drone swarm comes not more than ones a day, much lesser than they will have time to reload it. Matt sometimes thinks in the wrong direction.
Russian air defense is probably the best in the world bc their doctrine didn't bet everything on their air supremacy.
also Tunguska and s-300 has capabilities to attack ground targets if needed.
They need to bring back _37x252mmSR,_ which is still used in many countries including China but which Russia abandoned decades ago. They might also need to bring back _45x310mmR_ as a counterpart to the Western _40x365mmR,_ especially for naval use.
Russia's medium calibers is currently just 23x152mmB, 30x165mm, 30x210mmB (naval use), and 57x348mmSR. You can see the massive gaps in the middle. They don't even use 23x115mm except for some older aircraft, even though it and 14.5x114mm could be used in a Bushmaster-style autocannon where you just swap some parts for a caliber swap.
The 57mm was chosen because of its great reach in height and the greater power of the projectile compared to the 30mm. Drone armament can be used beyond the 30mm cannon range.
In a 57mm projectile, it is possible to install electronics without a significant loss in the power of the projectile and its ballistics.
The fire module itself is universal and can be installed not only on the BMP3.
At the beginning of the Syrian campaign, there was a lot of talk about the abandonment of cannon anti-aircraft weapons. The ZRPK "SA-22 Greyhound" was believed to be the last air defense missile system with guns.
The report of the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation (2015 or 2016) indicated that all aerial targets were destroyed by missiles (there was even a table with what and by what means they destroyed and in what quantity, unfortunately, after so many years, I can not find the link anymore.
However, further experience has shown that with the massive use of drones, missiles may simply not be enough ("SA-22 Greyhound" only 12 missiles). Not to mention the cost efficiency.
What caused the revision of the concept.
i guess italy was watching them closely, considering they finally got their government to cough up enough money for 76mm AA which they have wanted since the early 80s.
@@matthiuskoenig3378 Italian 76mm AA was probably spurred on by Boffors 57mm ammo, its competition in naval instalations with greater rate of fire. 76 mm smart ammo compensates for this with more reach and larger shrapnel clouds.
i think they wanted to make a more versatile weap0n,,, and with highter ranges.
Russia currently doesn't use any calibers that sit in-between _30x165mm_ or _30x210mmB_ and _57x348mmSR,_ but one they did use prior to the late-20th-century is *_37x252mmSR._* This cartridge is still used in many countries including China.
Russia needs to bring that back because 57mm is not appropriate for as many tasks that Russia seems to think it will apply for in the future battlefield.
Looks like it is supposed to be a light, air-deployable platform, while terminator is a much heavier vehicle that moves in tank formation
The terminator is there to support the tank groups, it helps pin down infantry and has ATGMs to help fight tanks, this would probably follow the tanks and Terminators from behind about 500m-1km to protect them from air targets, then the rest of the army follows them
You have your breakthrough groups(the frontline tanks and heavily armed and armored infantry and IFVs) followed by the cleanup groups, lighter infantry and transports and BTRs and smaller stuff to make sure the area is clear after breakthrough group has puahed through, then you have youe logistics following them, then command, artillery and SAMS and bigger air defence units
(and the VDV would've been deployed behind enemy lines to cause chaos, stuff like cutting coms, blowing up power stations, radio towers, strategic briges and plant mines, just make life hell for any units trying to respond to the breakthrough attack)
This is what I have seen them use, but they could change it, or it could be different
@@sovietred7371 i agree with you
@@sovietred7371 but i think this gun will be just effective on helicopter not fast moving air targets like gets becouse you need a much more higher rate fire to increase the chances to hit something is moving in fast of 1000 m/s or higher
Maybe A10 and of course drones
Nope) this AA system can use half-dumb programmable ammunition, but it was designed for laser-guided 57mm ammunition. It capable to hit the swarm of small drones. And this laser-guided ammunition is cheap. It looks like primitive missile without engine. Cheap and effective. Drone can change the trajectory and programmable ammunition is not effective against it. But drone can't dodge from guided shell with non-contact radio primer. This system can fire long burst of guided shells, drones have no chance to survive. Also Derivacia PVO can be connected to fire control system (FCS) with another AA systems and radars. FCS will increase capability to hit drones. Derivacia PVO is last line of AA defence.
I can see this being used as a part of the comprehensive ADN. The have missiles in numerous flavours and now guns in the same. A 57mm is going to kill A-10 and AH-64 at far longer ranges. It also allows for instant kills on IFV's.
They can but the rounds and the AGM can be a problem unless if it work on tandems but thats the same for the enemy aircraft as well
It can easily flank instant kill tanks as well. And mobility firepowerf tanks from the front easily.
this is mainly for drones, uses IR to track and set range fuse
The effective range is ofcourse higher, but with greater distance the problems with precision increases... especially with 3D (air) moving targets. The ruzians still need to show that they can volume produce intelligent ammunition for this, but for those kinds of ABM this is bit overpower, they sey intelligent munition these days needs about 30-35mm diameter to "fit" inside (and this will reduce with time further) so 57mm is overkill, and its questionable whether is better 1 bigger explosion or 2-3 smaller ones better covering the target area...
You just questioned the Ability to mass produce intelligent ammunition and in the same sentence said 2-3 smaller rounds might be be better.
If the limiting factor is the amount of electronics you produce, bigger IS better because you can't just shoot 3 times the rounds...
It is read as Dyereevatseeya
The “ye” is just a softer “E”
The “ts” is merged together into a hard sound
and the “ya” is read separately as a single letter
Thanks Rusiya Grammar Nazi 😉
Russia in ww2: ZSU57 on little tractor
Russia today: 57 mm on anti air
On newer tractor, BMP chasis
@@sovietred7371 well,it's not exactly what I would define as a tractor but still, close enough.
США Браунинг 50` в 1 мировой и 2023 год.
40mm Bofors needs to make a comeback as an anti-aircraft weapon.
Swedish army still use it on they CV90 Spaa variants
All Swedish CV90 variants use Bofors 40mm (except ARV).
Export CV90 customers use 30mm - 35mm guns...
@@petter5721 because it's more cheaper.
@@diligentone-six2688 What's cheaper? The surplus 40 mm guns Sweden happened to have lying around in the 80s?
40mm Bofors with 3P airburst ammo would be nice
That gun has a lot of depression capacity to be for anti-aircraft. That's a tank destroyer.
It is not a flak 88, nevermind about it
You can't define anti-aircraft platforms as "something with no depression" or tank destroyer as "something with a lot of depression". IS-2 is not an anti-aircraft platform and young angsty teenagers aren't tank destroyers.
ZSU-23-2 is also an AA but it was used as a heavy anti-sniper MG mounted on an Ural truck in Chechen war in 90s
Gaijin: *drooling*
You predicted it damn
I think the main points of the study are: Urban fighting capability and a lack of radar, making it less vulnerable to counterstrikes. Probably intended as a support vehicle that can move directly with IFVs and providing coverage directly where needed
It really reminds me of Swedish LvKv 90 SPAAG...
They need to remake this
Do a twin barrel version. Like the GSH-30-2K or GSH-23L
ZSU 57 : exists
I don't think this will replace the Tunguska or Pantsir. No active radar, or missiles; would be a step back. I think this is meant to deal with drones or loitering munitions that target active systems. It also doesn't hurt that it can seek out anti-tank teams with it's thermal/infrared tracker. Might actually be a competitor for terminator platform though that also has missiles. Could just be a standalone addition to battalion level support.
It seems that Matsimus does not require sleep as other humans...keep the uploads coming!
The old Shilka / ZSU-23 replaced a vehicle with twin 57mm guns on a lightened T54 chassis. The Shilka was a mast surprise in Vietnam and the Yom Kippur war.
Some sources say it was the 57mm that caused 60% of losses in Vietnam.
@@scudb5509 depends on the mission and altitude. Soviet doctrine is to use missiles to deny airspace and force aircraft to fly lower. Once you get into the lower atmosphere you then become vulnerable to various calibers of anti-aircraft artillery. That is precisely what the Arabs did in 1973.
@@scudb5509 the SA 2 also shot down a lot of aircraft, and the range of that thing scared spy planes.
ZSU-57-2
@@scudb5509 ZSU-57-2
Something I’m really curious to see is if such systems may be deployed in large numbers as an immediate counter to suicide drones like what we’re seeing in Azerbaijan.
If the suicide drones are numerous then the system may get overwhelmed
@@Proger-sj8cj are there any recorded recent case where a System successfully defended against more than 1 Suicide drones? or have a high hit ratio? If there is one I really want to look up the system
They dont need it. They have electronic warfare prepared and made for last ten years or so, just to counter drones.
@@uroskostic8570 I doubt it always work, since I heard a news that even a TOR system was taken out by a Suicide drone if I'm not wrong, or at least some form of Russian AA Platform
@@90enemies I dont know where TOR ? Armenia had TOR, but it wasnt in Karabah war region. Russian doctrine is , all systems work together. And no system is bulletproof. But it will give very good protection. We cant compare Syrian crews in Pantsir and Russian crews as we know Arabs cant fight.
What I find interesting
about this vehicle is that it negates the need for the Sprut Light Tank because the Derivatsiya can perfectly fill the light tank role while also serving as mobile AAA. Given the fact it’s size and weight are practically the same as that of the Sprut it also means Russian Airborne Forces or VDVs can also bring this vehicle as airborne armor.
The Sprut can put a big round downrange inflicting major damage with one shot, arriving much more quickly than an ATGM. I wouldn't write it off just yet.
How on earth does a tank firing 57x248mm fill the role of an otherwise 125mm tank? Maybe if it fired one of Russia's 100mm calibers then it could work.
@@poppinc8145 well the answer is that this wouldn’t be a tank but a light tank for which a smaller caliber weapon is acceptable in the interest of keeping the vehicle light and nimble, plus easy to transport by air and be airdropped.
Another factor to keep in mind is that while the caliber of the vehicle is certainly smaller than that of a tank the trade off is that it can also engage enemy aircraft making it far more versatile and multi role than a pure MBT and very suitable for expeditionary operations with rapid response units.
Another factor to consider is that the war in 🇺🇦 has shown us is that even small 30 mm auto cannon rounds can cause serious damage to tanks, so larger 57 mm ones should be good enough for defensive actions.
Bofors have made a 57mm gun since way back, especially for naval application.
Bofors 3P programmable ammunition (40 and 57mm) was developed in the 90s and now used widely.
Interesting to see this caliber on a vehicle...
I wonder if the Bofors 57mm with 3P can also be put on a hull/chassis. The new Thales RapidFire 40mm can also be attached on a back of a truck or maybe on a vehicle.
the russians also had a 57mm AA since way back, this is more of a return to an old trend then a radically new concept.
Iam not sure but i think tey did test the 57mm .Longer range and faster then the russian 57mm , 220p/min
Don't forget the 76mm on the Italian tank and centauro chassis.
Not suitable for IFV due to large ammo. It can not be stored enough rounds into also very wide feeder (turret).
the radar and precision aiming actuators are kinda expensive....
ww2 cruisers had this =))))))
On another channel,the gun is said to fire 3-4 round bursts per target.It looks fantastic..and the MG can engage different targets. Russian tactical doctrine requires all gun platforms be able to engage tanks, even their artillery has this capability.
Thanks for this, Mats. At the risk of sounding glass-half-empty, I think that a bit more understanding and analysis of the vehicle's AA role and capability would be helpful here. For example, is the reliance on optical systems for target detection/acquisition/engagement adequate on its own? Would a compact radar add to the vehicle's efficacy (in the same way is a the compact electronically-scanned system mounted on IM SHORAD/Stryker) or does the range of the gun/ammo make a longer-range detection system superfluous? Understanding this vehicle better may require more analysis of Russian tactics/doctrine its relationship to other vehicles (see below).
A lot of time was taken here up describing the chassis rather than the turret and its systems, but that's just an impression. The chassis is but a platform upon which to mount that unmanned 'combat module'. At 10:54 the viewer is shown the elevation of the gun, which looks impressive and demonstrates a capability to maintain a firing solution when the aerial target manages to get close. Yet the matter of elevation wasn't even mentioned. (Is this because of a lack of firm data?)
I respectfully disagree that the Gepard is (was?) and example of spraying ammo into the skies in hopes of getting a hit. Once the AHEAD ammo entered service in the 1980s, the whole notion of 'spray 'em' went out the door. (The Cdn Army used this ammo in its long-retired towed 35mm Oerlikon GDF-005 guns.) Now fewer rounds could be expended for the same result. One assumes that the same notion applies to the 2S38. Sure, as an operator I'd like more stowed rounds, but as with so many other instances the answer may lie in mass or tactics or doctrine rather than technology. Perhaps the Russians intend to operate the 2S38 in small groups under innovative C2, in which case 150 rounds/track turns into 600/platoon - enough to sustain a bubble over a combat team or (alongside Pantsyr) a battalion group for a reasonable amount of time.
Surveying the lack of SPAAG capability across NATO, I wouldn't complain too much about any of 2S38's perceived weaknesses. If drones indeed are a major threat (and I believe this to be the case) then a way of neutralizing lots of them them (electronically and/or kinetically) in a cost-effective manner is essential. For the kinetic side of the house, a medium-range gun with programmable ammo is likely cheaper than using missiles. NATO armies who think that they can disperse or camouflage their way to safety really need to think seriously about this.
Even expected combat places unexpected demands on equipment. Best have your AA gun be able to AG just in case.
Nothing is worse for an AA battery then to find their position under attack by ground forces.
Nooo you can’t just make big gun go boom boom boom boom, it’s too fast
Russia: cyka
Seems like if they did put it in production on the BMP3 chassis they might be looking to mix it in lighter units. BMP3 is amphibious Terminator is not.
Mat: why would you make an anti air and ground vehicle?
Me who plays warthunder:
The russians really are going all out on the unmanned turret thing
The Stinger System was also supposed to be set up as a remote control turret, with a dismount to act as a counter attack in case the turret got strafed.
I mean, it is very weight saving. Not having armor protect empty space needed for a crew, throws off a few tons.
BAE Systems also make a smart munition for their 40mm and 57mm weapon systems, the 3P multi-mode fuze
BIG FAN MAT
CAN YOU DO VIDEOS ON THE
J-20
J-31
X-47B
And
YF-23?
Other youtubers: Thanks for sponsoring me
Matsimus: Thanks for allowing me to sponsor you (3:28)
Yeah, I thought that was pretty funny but I guess in way he is sponsoring them by extending his brand and then, as the theory of sponsorship goes, his credibility to them when he puts them forward as a good product.
So, the wallet company financially sponsors him to sponsor them.
I’m just glad to see someone is still making guns in 57mm caliber