ZSU-37-2

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
ZSU-37-2 Yenisei
General properties
crew 4th
length 6.36 m
width 3.10 m
height 3.32 m
Dimensions 27.5 tons
Armor and armament
Main armament 2 × 37 mm automatic cannon 500P, water-cooled
Secondary armament no
agility
drive V12 diesel engine W105-W
400 hp
suspension Torsion bar
Top speed 60 km / h
Power / weight 14.5 hp / ton
Range 450 km

The ZSU-37-2 “Yenisei” was an anti-aircraft tank developed in the Soviet Union in the late 1950s . After testing, the development of the project was stopped in 1962 and the anti-aircraft self-propelled gun was not transferred to series production.

designation

The original name is Russian ЗСУ-37-2 "Енисей" ( transcription : ZSU = Senitnaja Samochodnaja Ustanowka, German anti-aircraft guns - self-propelled gun , abbreviated to Fla-Sfl). The GRAU index of the weapon system is 2A1, the index of the main tank administration of the Ministry of Defense of the USSR ( Russian главное автобронетанковое управление Министерства обороны ) is 119 (Object 119 (Обороны)).

development

During the Second World War , the Red Army did not have its own self-propelled anti-aircraft weapons. The ZSU-37 was produced in small numbers from 1945, but was no longer used. After the end of the war, efforts were made in the Soviet Union to develop modern and powerful anti-aircraft weapons. From 1955 the ZSU-57-2 was introduced, but it had several conceptual and constructional shortcomings. The weapon system did not have a radar device and was therefore unable to carry out its own reconnaissance, and the fire control system no longer met the requirements. The cadence of the two 57mm cannons was too low. Overall, the ZSU-57-2 was practically ineffective in the fight against air targets at an altitude of more than 1500 m, could not be used at night and with poor visibility and was only partially suitable for fighting high-speed and low-flying air targets.

In 1957, the development of a modern Fla-Sfl with two 57-mm cannons was commissioned. The object 530 should have a radar device for reconnaissance and fire control. After the construction of a mock-up , however, the development was discontinued in 1958, as the set goals were easier to achieve with small-caliber weapons.

The development of the ZSU-37-2 was directed on April 17, 1958 with the decree of the Council of Ministers of the USSR №426-211. At the same time, the development of the Fla-Sfl-23-4 was commissioned. During this period, numerous new weapon systems were developed in parallel in the USSR. There were several reasons for this. On the one hand, it became clear that all requirements could not be met by an air defense system. The different operational principles and tasks of the units and units of the Soviet Army required the development of different weapon systems. Furthermore, it was not yet foreseeable whether anti-aircraft missiles or conventional artillery weapons would be more advantageous in defending against air targets at altitudes of 3 to 5 km in mobile combat. Since there was no experience in the development of such complex weapons in the Soviet Union, the development risk was also minimized. Ultimately, however, this also led to an overuse of the existing development resources.

Formally, the ZSU-37-2 Jenissei and the ZSU-23-4 "Schilka" were not competing projects. The ZSU-37-2 was to be used in tank regiments and divisions, the ZSU-23-4 in motorized rifle regiments and divisions. While the ZSU-37-2 was supposed to fight air targets at an altitude of up to 3000 m, an altitude range of up to 1500 m was specified for the ZSU-23-4. According to Soviet ideas, tank units often acted on their own; additional anti-aircraft equipment was not available to them. The ZSU-37-2 should therefore ensure the protection of the armored units against air targets in the largest possible elevation range. At the same time, it had to be agile enough that it could follow tanks on the march and in combat. Furthermore, armoring the vehicle was essential.

technology

chassis

The chassis of the ZSU-37-2 was derived from the self-propelled gun SU-100P . The SU-100P was developed at Ural Transmasch (Уралтрансмаш) from 1947. The originally planned variant with the 100 mm D-50 cannon was not built in series, but the chassis was the basis for numerous other vehicles. The base vehicles derived from the SU-100P for the launch pad 1P25 and the reconnaissance and control station 1S32 of the anti-aircraft missile complex 2K11 Krug were developed as objects 123 and 124 , object 303 was the chassis of the 152 mm Sfl 2S3 .

With the SU-100P, a support roller drive with six rollers and three support rollers on each side was used. The engine and transmission were in the front part of the vehicle, so the drive wheel was also in the front. The rollers were cushioned with torsion bars , the rollers on the first and last axles were hydraulically damped. A liquid-cooled V-12 diesel engine with the designation W-105-W was installed as the engine. With a displacement of 38.88 liters, it delivered an output of 400 hp. This enabled a speed of 60 km / h to be achieved on the road and between 20 and 25 km / h off-road. The driving range was 450 km on roads and 310 km off-road.

The tub was welded together from armored sheet metal. It protected the crew and equipment against fire from hand weapons of caliber 7.62 m from a distance of 400 m. The fighting compartment was in the rear of the vehicle. A turret, also welded together from armor sheet metal, was placed on this part, which housed the weapons system, the electronic equipment and the crew with the exception of the driver.

The ZSU-37-2 was equipped with a gas turbine to supply power to the electronic systems in the stand .

Armament

The automatic 37-mm cannon 500P (500П) developed in the experimental design office OKB-16 (ОКБ-16) under the direction of Alexander Emmanuilowitsch Nudelman was used in the weapon system . It was a new design. The usual 37 mm ammunition for weapons imported into the Soviet Army could not be fired by the 500P. The 500P was also used in the 4 × 37 mm Flak Shkwal (Шквал), which were produced in small numbers . For the ZSU-37-2, two of these weapons were combined in the OKB-43 in the Angara weapon system (Ангара). The barrel of the cannon was 82 calibers in length. The weapon fired cartridge ammunition, which was fed via belts. In normal operation, bursts of fire with a maximum of 150 shots could be fired due to the water cooling, after which the barrel was cooled for 30 seconds. The cannon received the GRAU index 2A11, the weapon system the GRAU index 2A12.

The weapon system was installed in the center of the front part of the turret. The directional range was between −1 and + 85 °. The combat set of 540 grenade cartridges was carried in belt bunkers to the left and right of the weapon. The weapons were straightened with electrohydraulic directional drives, the conversion to electrical directional drives was planned. The straightening drives received the GRAU index 2Ä14 (2Э14).

37mm autocannon 500P
General properties
classification Anti-aircraft cannon
Chief designer Alexander Emmanuilowitsch Nudelman
GRAY index 2A11
Manufacturer
pipe
caliber 37 mm
Pipe length (L / 82)
Fire dates
Elevation range −1 ° to + 85 °
Side straightening area 360 °
Maximum range 4,500 m
Maximum muzzle velocity 1000 m / s
fire rate 900-1200 rounds / min
Top speed in tow 35 km / h

Fire control system

For the ZSU-37-2, the equipment complex (радиолокационно-приборный комплекс) Baikal (Байкал) was developed in the scientific research institute NII-20 (НИИ-20), which included a radar device for reconnaissance and target support as well as a fire control unit. The device complex received the GRAY index 1A11 (1А11), the radar device the GRAY index 1RL34 (1РЛ34). The radar worked with a wavelength of 3 cm. The antenna system was installed on the rotating tower. It could be folded down during the march to reduce the height of the vehicle. With the radar device, air targets could be automatically monitored up to a distance of 20 km. The automatic accompaniment was possible in the range between 100 and 300 m up to a speed of the air target of 415 m / s, in the range over 300 m height up to a speed of 660 m / s. The vertical recommended speed was 40 ° / s.

While the automatic target accompaniment met the requirements, the parameters achieved in the all-round search mode, i.e. reconnaissance, were not satisfactory. This was due to the concept of the radar system and also applied to the ZSU-23-4 to the same extent. Both weapon systems used only one radar device with one antenna for all-round search and target accompaniment. As a result, no clarification could be carried out while accompanying and fighting the target. The antenna had a needle-shaped, very narrow directional diagram for accompanying the target . For an all-round search, however, a Cosecans² diagram is more advantageous. The use of the needle-shaped diagram meant that when the antenna was rotated by 360 °, it was not possible to search the entire altitude range; several rotations in different altitude sectors were necessary for complete clarification. This in turn meant that a disproportionately long time was required for the target change. For the ZSU-23-4, for example, this was 11 seconds, so that the second and further air targets could only be fought with this weapon system in practice with the aid of the ring sight plate in the optical sight. These fundamental problems were only solved in the Gepard anti-aircraft gunship through the use of two separate radars with independently operating antennas.

To solve the problem, the Ob (Обь) system was developed for the ZSU-37-2 . The development had already been instructed No. 426-211, the testing was scheduled for the second quarter of 1960. The Ob system consisted of the Baikal equipment complex of the ZSU-37-2 and the Irtysh (Иртыш) radar station on the Neva (Нева) command vehicle. The Irtysh radar station was intended for reconnaissance, the target data were then transferred to the Ob system , which then picked up and accompanied the target. This ensured that an air picture was also provided during the target escort and combat. A command vehicle Neva was provided for each battery of six to eight ZSU-37-2s . Its introduction offered another advantage: the vehicles of a battery were originally not networked with each other, the commanders did not have a common situation report. This makes the coordination of the fire fight more difficult, since unintentional multiple or non-combats of air targets are possible. A uniform image of the air situation from the command vehicle would have made it much easier to conduct the fire fight. In the middle of 1959, however, the development of the Ob system was discontinued in order to be able to use the development capacities for the development of the 2K11 Krug anti-aircraft missile complex . The ZSU-3-7-2 was therefore only tested with the Baikal device complex with the known disadvantages. No corresponding system was available for the ZSU-23-4 during its entire service life, however, a corresponding conceptual approach was successfully implemented with the 9S44 Krab guidance system for the 2K11 Krug and 2K12 Kub missile complexes .

testing

Although developed in different programs, the ZSU-37-2 and the ZSU-23-4 were tested almost simultaneously. The first test samples were completed in December 1960, the factory tests took place from December 1960 to August 1961, the state tests from August to October 1961. During the tests, the ZSU-37-2 covered a distance of 1185 km, 6266 Shots were fired from the guns.

Comparison with 57 mm anti-aircraft guns

As expected, the ZSU-37-2 performed significantly better than the ZSU-57-2. The probability of annihilation for a MiG-17 air target was at least 1.9 times higher. The ZSU-37-2 also reached altitudes where the ZSU-57-2 was ineffective. But also in the fight against low-flying air targets, the higher target speeds and the higher cadence led to significantly better performance. Another advantage was the fact that the ZSU-37-2 could fight fire even at night and with poor visibility. Both weapon systems were able to fight air targets while moving, but the effectiveness of the ZSU-57-2 suffered significantly.

But it was also clearly superior to the 57 mm FlaK S-60 , with the GRS-9 gun straightening station being used to control the fire of the S-60 . Here the probability of destruction was at least 1.7 times higher. In contrast to the S-60, the ZSU-37-2 could also fight targets while on the move.

The ZSU-37-2 also scored significantly better in terms of effectiveness . The low probability of destruction of the ZSU-57-2 made it necessary to fight a single air target with a battery of four vehicles. A battery with six S-60s could also fight only one air target, as there was only one gun alignment station per battery. This resulted in a personnel expenditure of seven soldiers for the ZSU-37-2 compared to 28 for the ZSU-57-2 and 46 soldiers for the S-60.

Overall, the ZSU-37-2 was considered a successful design. According to the assessment of the state testing commission, the ZSU-37-2 ensured the protection of tank formations from air targets up to an altitude of 3000 m. The commission therefore recommended that the ZSU-37-2 be included in the armament. It was also proposed to use the ZSU-37-2 for the close-range defense of the anti-aircraft missile complexes 2K11 Krug and 2K12 Kub .

Comparative data of the ZSU-37-2
parameter S-60 with GRS-9 ZSU-57-2 ZSU-37-2
Destruction probability in the amount of:
200 m 7% 8th % 15%
500 m 15% 18% 25%
1000 m 23% 8th % 39%
1500 m 22% 2% 42%
2000 m 18% -% 38%
3000 m 14% -% 30%
Ballistic data
Range, m 6000 5000 4500
Muzzle velocity, m / s 1000 1000 1000
Bullet weight, kg 2.8 2.8 0.7
Cadence, rounds per minute 100-120 200-240 900-1200
Target dates
Maximum speed, m / s 580 240 660
Combat characteristics
Fire control Radar GRS-9
PUAZO-6 		- radar
Night combat and all weather capability Yes No Yes
Fire fight from the movement No limited Yes
Combat set, number of shell cartridges - 256 540
Total weight of one weapon, kg 4875 28000 27500
Operation per weapon 7th 7th 4th
smallest tactically deployable unit Battery (6 - 8 guns) Battery (4 Fla-Sfl) Fla-Sfl
Operating strength overall 46 28 4th

Comparison with the ZSU-23-4

Although it was developed independently from the ZSU-23-4, the similar parameters also resulted in a comparison with the ZSU-23-4. The caliber and bullet weight in a height range of more than 1000 m were advantageous here. The probability of destruction of both weapon systems against air targets at an altitude of 1000 m was the same, at 1500 m that of the ZSU-37-2 was slightly higher. Due to the ballistic performance of the 23 mm cannons, the Schilka could not act against air targets at an altitude of 2000 m and more. At low altitudes, however, the ZSU-23-4 was 1.4 to 1.9 times more effective.

Overall, the question arose whether motorized rifle and tank units should be equipped with only one of the two systems.

The ZSU-37-2 was able to reliably protect tank formations alone against air targets at altitudes of up to 3000 m and at a distance of 4500 m. In practice, when the ZSU-37-2 was deployed, precise air attacks against the protected tank formations were impossible. Another advantage was the fact that the 37 mm caliber allowed more effective self-protection and a better effect against ground targets.

The weight of the ZSU-37-2, which was just under 28 tons, initially proved to be a disadvantage. This weight was too high for use in motorized rifle associations. The price was also a disadvantage. A price of 300,000 rubles was given for the ZSU-23-4 and a price of 400,000 rubles for the ZSU-37-2.

Comparative data of the ZSU-37-2
parameter ZSU-23-4 ZSU-37-2
Destruction probability in the amount of:
200 m 28% 15%
500 m 35% 25%
1000 m 39% 39%
1500 m 39% 42%
2000 m -% 38%
3000 m -% 30%
Ballistic data
Range, m 2500 4500
Range of direct shot , m 1100 1200
Muzzle velocity, m / s 1000 1000
Bullet weight, kg 0.2 0.7
Cadence, rounds per minute 3200-3600 900-1200
Armor steel penetration at a distance of
500 m 25th 50
1000 m 20th 35
1500 m 10 30th
2000 m - 25th
Target dates
Maximum speed, m / s 445 660
Combat characteristics
Fire control radar radar
Night combat and all weather capability Yes Yes
Fire fight from the movement Yes Yes
Combat set, number of shell cartridges 2000 540
Total weight of a vehicle, kg 19000 27500
Operation per weapon 4th 4th
costs
Price, rubles 300,000 400,000

Comparison with the 9K33 Osa

In the early 1960s, the 9K33 Osa anti- aircraft missile complex was developed in the Soviet Union . The program was initially strongly influenced by the American MIM-46 Mauler . The 9K33 was also intended for the protection of tank formations. Due to the similar purpose, a comparison of the two weapon systems was inevitably made, although the 9K33 was still in the project stage and the completion of the first prototype was not planned until the fourth quarter of 1963.

The main advantages of the ZSU-37-2 were that it was possible to combat air targets while the vehicle was in motion, while the 9K33 had to be stationary when the anti-aircraft missiles were launched and while they were being guided. Also, the electronic equipment and the weapon system made it possible to fight air targets at a speed of 660 m / s, while the 9K33 could fight a maximum of 500 m / s fast air targets. However, the range of the 9K33 with 8000 m was significantly higher than that of the ZSU-37-2 with 5000 m. The 9K33 could also fight aerial targets at altitudes of up to 5000 m, the ZSU-37-2 only at altitudes of up to 4500 m. The 9K33 was only half as heavy as the ZSU-37-2 - 14 tons - and only required three instead of four men.

Overall, the ZSU-37-2 could obviously be replaced by a combined equipment with the ZSU-23-4 and the 9K33. A replacement of both weapon systems by the ZSU-37-2 was also conceivable in principle, but this would have been paid for with losses in the altitude ranges below 1000 m and above 4500 m as well as a limitation of the range to 5000 m.

Suspension of the project

The State Testing Commission proposed that both the ZSU-23-4 Shilka and the ZSU-37-2 Yenisei be included in the armament of the Soviet Army. With the instruction of the Council of Ministers №925-401 of September 5, 1962, however, only the ZSU-23-4 Shilka was taken over into the armament of the Soviet Army, on September 20 of this year the instruction was issued to discontinue the ZSU-37-2 Yenisei project .

As a result, Soviet motorized rifle and armored troop units were initially only equipped with the ZSU-23-4 Schilka , with a battery of initially six and later four vehicles per regiment. The 9K33 was not included in the armament of the Soviet Army until 1971, after a fundamental change in design in 1965. It was used there in the anti-aircraft missile regiments of the motorized rifle divisions and partially replaced the 2K12 Kub anti-aircraft missile complex there .

The discontinuation of the ZSU-37-2 Jenissei project is viewed critically in many cases today. From today's point of view, none of the tried and tested weapon systems was clearly superior, in addition to which the 9K33 Osa system in the configuration considered in 1960 for the intended area of ​​application never became ready for series production. The ZSU-23-4 Schilka suffered from the lack of information available. However, the ZSU-37-2 also had this disadvantage; according to the state of the art at the time, it could only have been eliminated by introducing the Ob system .

The most serious disadvantages, however, turned out to be the range and weapon effectiveness of the ZSU-23-4. As a result of the Yom Kippur War , some anti-aircraft tanks reached the USA via Israel and were used there to attempt shelling of the A-10 and A-7 aircraft. As a result of the tests, various measures were introduced to increase the survivability of the A-10, so that it could practically no longer be fought successfully with the 23 mm ammunition. In the 1980s, further deficiencies in the weapon system became apparent. With the increasing transition to stand-off weapons, the range of the 23 mm cannons was no longer sufficient. The ZSU-23-4 could be fought by attack helicopters with anti-tank guided missiles that were outside the range of the flak tank. As a result, the USSR switched back to the 30 mm caliber from 1970 onwards, which enabled a good compromise between ballistic performance on the one hand and size and weight on the other.

literature

  • А. Широкорад : «Шилка» и другие отечественные зенитные самоходные установки in Техника и и вооруженые , 8/2009 (Russian , срегазад: вяворужение: 2009, Russian, вооружение, 8/2009, вооружение: вяв чение: 2009, Russian, счение: 2009 вооружение: в вооружение: вооружение: 2009, вооружение: 2009
  • М. В. Павлов, И. В. Павлов: Отечественные бронированные машины 1945–1965 гг. in Техника и вооружение: вчера, сегодня, завтра , edition 8/2009 (Russian)
  • А. Бобков: ЗСУ-37-2 "Енисей": Альтернативная история in Техника и вооружение: вчера, сегодня, завтра (Russian, edition 2/2011)
  • Карпенко А. В., Ганин С. М. Бастион: 37-мм зенитная самоходная установка ЗСУ-37-2 "Енисей" in Военно-технический сборник . ISSN 1609-557X

Web links

Individual evidence

  1. ↑ with tower in 0 ° position 6.715 m
  2. ↑ with antenna in working position 3.55 m
  3. ↑ The transcription of the abbreviation differs from the usual transcription rules in the German-language Wikipedia, but has become commonplace for such vehicles from Soviet production in German-language literature.
  4. ↑ a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r s t u v w А. Б. Широкорад : «Шилка» и другие отечественные зенитные самоходные установки (Russian)
  5. ↑ for a MiG-17 air target
  6. ↑ for a MiG-17 air target
  7. ↑ angle of incidence 90 °
  8. ↑ Flight International, 1974, No. 3383, p. 62