Frag Out! Magazine
Issue link: https://fragout.uberflip.com/i/1173894
namically refined ammunition. The accuracy attained by Rak at dis- tances beyond 10 kilometers, with the use of rounds that are relatively short, is comparable to the accuracy achievable by rifled-barrel mor- tars at a distance of 7 kilometers. Also, bore-wear is very much limited in case of Rak, when compared to Vena. Furthermore, Rak may also lay down effective direct fire, also against moving targets. This is fa- cilitated both by the armament, as well as by the fact that the platform features a thermal sight and a ballistic computer. Vena's ability to lay down rapid fire is limited here, not to mention the situational aware- ness. Rak uses 16 thermal imaging and daytime cameras offering a 360 deg FOV. What's interesting, Rak remains capable of laying down direct fire at distances longer than the older 2A51. The specification of the Polish mortar corresponds with that of 2A80 - 800 to 1200 metres. Precision guided rounds are another advantage of the Rak mortar. Rus- sian Gran ammunition and its derivatives require target designation. Meanwhile, the laser target designator for these rounds, along with the synchronizer module made by Malakhit, weighs 37 kilograms, which is a lot. APR120 rounds are quite interesting here, as they feature a single shaped-charge warhead that probably offers penetration capa- bilities on par with the Spike ATGM. Rounds are laser guided. However, contrary to the competitive or legacy designs, the Polish engineers introduced a number of solutions, in the new ammo and the LPC-1 designator weighing 13.7 kg, that not only increase the hit probability, but they also make it possible to overcome the active protection mea- sures used by the enemy. These elements make it impossible for the enemy laser warning receivers to detect or classify the beam. Second- ly, the enemy will not even have time to effectively employ counter- measures, since LPC-1 is active only for a short period of time. Some solutions implemented in the ammunition itself make it possible to hit the target even when laser guidance is interrupted. Ammunition can also be fired directly, in a way similar to a conventional HEAT round. However, APR120 exhibits much higher penetration performance, when compared to the Russian designs. No compensation driving ring is required that would compensate the rotation of the round. Element as such may decrease the shaped-charge's penetration capability by as much as 40%. The Rak system is also complete in its form, within the framework of the "fire module", as it includes a dedicated set of C2 vehicles, ammunition carriers, repair platforms, recce/target des- ignation vehicles and ARVs. Vena's system is modest, to say the least. Protection systems also remain quite interesting here. Even though the level of ballistic protection remains comparable, the Polish vehi- cle with a thick spall linear, Duegra extinguishing and anti-explosion system and low sensitivity ammunition, stands a greater chance of surviving a potential hit. On the other hand, the Russian APS offers ca- pabilities tantamount to those of the Polish Obra solution. 2S31 Vena has better off-road capabilities, it carries 32% more rounds and offers a greater range if RAP ammunition is used, with the ammunition offer- ing explosive yield that is 40% higher. On the other hand, Vena's rate of fire is 25% - 33% lower and its accuracy, despite the rifled barrel, is not better. Fire control system has no C3ITAR/BMS features. The com- mander's situational awareness is much worse as well. Post-hit sur- vivability is significantly lower. Vena also is less capable of hitting the targets directly, the limitations arise on the grounds of the fire control system's profile, as well as on the grounds of the ammunition design. PGMs are much more capable and clearly better in case of Rak. Fur- thermore, the maintenance cost and availability are simply incompa- rable, as Rak is based on the proven Rosomak APC platform. SMK120 made in Poland also benefits from an expansive maintenance support system that is selective, at its best, in case of the Russian counterpart. 2S34 Khosta is another Russian self-propelled mortar - a budget modernization of the 2S1, implemented through integration of a 2A80- 1 rifled barrel mortar coupled with a muzzle device. The initial plan assumed that a new control system would be introduce, along with a digital R163-50U radio, INS system, GLONASS sat-nav, command- er's MFD with a console and gunner's MFD, altimeter, speedometer and the aforesaid 2A80-1 mortar along with two automated ammu- nition storage spaces behind the turret mount. Remote control gun module with a night sight was also considered as a possible addition. Ultimately, the scope of modernization did not survive the budget- ary cuts. 60 examples of a modestly upgraded mortar survived the financial massacre. They do not even feature a modern, automated C4ISR solution. Leaving the obsolete fire control system aside (with fire solutions transmitted over the radio from the C2 vehicles) 2A80 turned out to be a major disadvantage (its ammo in particular), when coupled with the tightness of the 2S1 hull. The above factors limit the rate of fire down to 4 RPM (!) - nowhere near the manufacturer's spec of 9 RPM. It is difficult then to point to any advantages that Khosta may have over the Rak system - low weight and good off-road capa- bilities are the only areas that comes mind. The system in question is too primitive and its rate of fire is too low to create any sensible and rational comparisons with the SMK 120 Rak self-propelled mortar. 2S42 Lotos is the latest Russian designs rolled out in the public, using the 120 mm 2A80-1 rifled barrel mortar. The platform is based on an extended length BMD-4M and features a high quality soft-kill APS and a remote-control armament module. The vehicle is quite in- teresting and would constitute a precious asset for the Russian air- borne units. Unfortunately, the Russians have not resolved the painful problems related to the Vena's rate of fire. Due to the lack of specs available, it also remains difficult to compare 2S42 to the Polish Rak system. Nordic Triplets: Amos, Nemo, Mjølner Swedish-Finnish AMOS system is a design dating back to 1996 when Hägglunds Vehicle began a design process pertaining to a new twin-barrel autonomous turret-mounted mortar. Everything revolved around a 1994 memorandum that brought Sweden, Finland, Denmark and Norway together to develop and define requirements for designs as such, with the two latter nations assum- ing an observer role. It was in 1999 when Finland signed a contract for development of a new mortar. Finland was joined by the Swedish FMV agency in 2000. The new platform was ready in 2004, while the de- liveries began in 2006. The weapon was integrated on the reinforced AMV platform and it was received by the Finnish FDF. Unfortunately, the high price of a system so advanced and defense cuts in the Scan- dinavia hampered the program and brought it to a halt. Only Finland has signed a contract for 18 mortars, including upgrades for the 4 that have already been delivered. Sweden, the second partner, decided to acquire the budget Mjølner system. As a result of the above Amos www.fragoutmag.com