Let us allow ourselves a little preface.
Speaking about the artillery of the last century, I would like to once again express some admiration. Indeed, the god of war. Yes, today stories about artillery systems do not cause such interest and excitement as stories / demonstrations of the same tanks, but …
Agree, there is something mesmerizing about these howitzers and guns. Yes, there is no closeness and mystery of tanks (and what's inside?), Everything is in plain sight. But this does not make the guns and howitzers less attractive.
Although we may be just artillery maniacs.
Working with numerous materials about the ML-20 howitzer-gun, we felt the constant "pressure" of the authority of really respected and authoritative predecessors. Almost all works have a lot of rave reviews, examples, comparisons. The system created by F. F. Petrov really deserves these words. It already deserves for how many soldiers' lives it saved in numerous wars of the 20th century. Or, on the contrary, it took it - in relation to the lives of the soldiers of the opposing side.
And in gratitude for the lives saved, the front-line soldiers called this destroyer of artillery batteries, engineering structures and armored vehicles of the enemy Emelya. I don’t want analogies, but the fabulous Emelya could do everything too. The only difference is that one used the capabilities of the pike, and the second did with what the creators awarded him.
However, with all due respect to the opinion of the artillery authorities, it is impossible to create a "universal" that would correspond to the best examples of "specialists". A specialized weapon will always be better than a general purpose one. A cannon is better than a cannon howitzer, and so is a howitzer.
But such advantages are visible only when the commander has different types of artillery systems. Which does not happen often in a war.
This can explain the enthusiasm that the ML-20 cannon-howitzer was awarded with absolutely correctly.
Before starting a conversation about this system, it is necessary to clarify the very term used for this tool. Howitzer cannon. The fact is that in some works this term is changed to the opposite: howitzer cannon. In the designation of such tools, the first place is always put that type of tool, the property of which is preserved to a greater extent. For the ML-20, this is a howitzer. Therefore, it is necessary to call this system a cannon-howitzer, not a howitzer-cannon.
True, the authors did not find such a term in the descriptions of any other artillery systems. An interesting conclusion follows from this. Most likely, the term was introduced specifically for ML-20. He kind of emphasized the unique fighting qualities of these guns.
The classic short-barreled field howitzers were more powerful weapons. In this they were superior to the ML-20. And the classic long-range long-barreled guns of special power surpassed the ML-20 in firing range. In theory, it turns out that the new system is inferior to both systems. Thus, there seems to be no need for such a tool.
And what about in practice? ML-20 is located as if in a niche between field howitzers and long-range guns of special power. And it is necessary to consider this fact from a completely different position.
In confrontation with howitzers, this system has an undoubted advantage - the firing range. This means that in real combat it is capable of striking enemy howitzer batteries without the possibility of return fire. An excellent counter-battery weapon!
It is more difficult with guns of special power. Here, with the same combat tactics as against howitzers, the system will clearly lose. But! ML-20 is lighter and more mobile. And, therefore, it is capable of changing positions much faster than heavy weapons of special power.
Of course, the heavy ML-20 "creeping up on their bellies" to a battery of German long-range guns would look ridiculous. But, in the history of the Great Patriotic War there are examples of just such a confrontation. And howitzer-cannons won these battles! Not at the expense of more confident shooting. They just took care of the long-range guns. Piece fighters. And quite difficult to manufacture. Therefore, in the event of shelling with serious guns, the batteries changed positions!
By the way, the issue of the cost of the weapon, as well as the issue of technological solutions for production, is of no small importance in the conditions of preparation for war. And in the period of war, it is archaic. The tool should be cheap to manufacture and technologically simple to manufacture.
The history of the ML-20 cannon-howitzer begins in tsarist Russia. It was then that in the Russian army, perhaps, the most successful weapon of that time appeared: the 152-mm siege cannon of the 1910 model of the Schneider system. At least in terms of ballistics, at that time, there was no better weapon in the world.
By the end of the Civil War, it became clear that the gun needed to be modernized. Conversations about this, in the end, turned into a task for the Perm plant No. 172 (Motovilikhinsky plant). The modernization was carried out two times. In 1930 and 1934. However, the shortcomings of the old weapon could not be corrected. Although, some innovations made it possible to talk about more or less successful modernization. But the requirements for such weapons were constantly growing.
On the instructions of GAU, the Motovilikhinsky plant began work on a new ML-15 gun. Moreover, this system should have been really new in many respects. However, factory # 172 was a production! And the designers were well aware that any "technology revolution" for the plant would result in many problems.
That is why, in parallel, on an initiative basis, work was carried out on the design of another system - ML-20. A system that would use the technologies already created at the plant would be easier to manufacture and, ultimately, could be introduced into production as soon as possible.
Both systems borrowed the barrel with a bolt from their predecessor. Moreover, the ML-20 used a wheel drive, cushioning and gun beds mod. 1910/34
The GAU task was completed by April 1936. The gun entered field trials.
Alas, the product turned out to be unfinished. Tests have shown that the system does not meet the requirements. The sample was sent to the factory for revision. It was the "revolutionary" character of the weapon that affected.
In March 1937, the second tests of the ML-15 began. This time, the gun showed exactly the results that the military demanded. Moreover, some sources even talk about positive recommendations for the serial production of this system.
In December 1936, the second sample was delivered to the test site. On December 25, 1936, tests of the ML-20 began. For most of the requirements, this system corresponded to the tasks set. Some comments related to the gun carriage. The revision did not take much time and the weapon became exactly what the military saw it.
Until now, there are disputes about why the ML-20 was adopted for service.
The authors of many works refer to the opinion of such a "monster" as A. B. Shirokorad. Indeed, the ML-15 was more mobile due to the smaller one (by 500 kg in combat and 600 kg in the stowed position), had a higher transport speed (up to 45 km / h), and a more modern but complex carriage.
In our opinion, Shirokorad was prevented by the "blinkers" of a prominent specialist. From the point of view of a scientist, ML-15 is better. But life makes its own adjustments. The fact that GAU accepted the ML-20 was significantly influenced by the designer of the plant. Manufacturers.
Since the technological equipment for the production of the ML-15 had to be developed, and this required time and money, it was the position of the production workers that played a decisive role. At a minimum cost, we will provide the tools as soon as possible! We have ready-made lines for the production of all components of the tool.
True, yes, one can seriously object to the weight of the guns. But this drawback is completely insignificant in view of the fact that the system was not designed for the regimental or divisional level. It was a hull gun. Moreover, the ML-20 became a duplex with the 122 mm A-19 cannon.
Whatever it was, but on September 22, 1937, the ML-20 was adopted by the Red Army under the official name "152-mm Howitzer-Cannon Model 1937".
The gun had a rather modern design for its time with a carriage with sliding beds and a sprung wheel travel. The barrel was produced in two varieties - bonded and monoblock (some sources mention the third option - with a free pipe).
The ML-20 was equipped with a piston bolt, a hydraulic spindle-type recoil brake, a hydropneumatic knurler and had a separate-sleeve loading.
The bolt has a mechanism for forced extraction of the spent cartridge case when it is opened after a shot and a safety device that locks the bolt after loading before firing a shot. If, for any reason, it was necessary to discharge the gun, then you must first turn on the fuse switch to allow the bolt to open.
To facilitate loading at high elevation angles, the ML-20 breech is equipped with a sleeve retention mechanism. The descent is done by pulling the trigger with the release cord.
The gun had a mutual closure mechanism that prevents the bolt from opening if the barrel is not properly connected to the recoil devices. To mitigate the recoil on the recoil devices and the carriage, the ML-20 was equipped with a powerful massive slit-type muzzle brake. The recuperator and the recuperator contain 22 liters of liquid each, the pressure in the recuperator is 45 atmospheres.
A distinctive feature of the ML-20 is a unique combination of various elevation angles and initial velocities of the projectile, which are set by choosing one of thirteen propellant charges. As a result, the gun could be used both as a howitzer, firing along a hinged trajectory with a relatively low projectile velocity, and as a cannon, along a flat trajectory with a high projectile velocity. The gun was equipped with both a telescopic sight for direct fire and an artillery panorama for firing from closed positions.
The carriage with sliding beds is equipped with a balancing mechanism and a shield cover. Metal wheels with rubber tires (some early guns had wheels with spokes and rubber weights from a cannon model 1910/34), leaf springs.
The transport of the gun was usually carried out on a gun carriage with the barrel in a retracted position.
The transition time from the traveling position to the combat position was 8-10 minutes. For short distances, the system could be transported with an open barrel at a speed of 4-5 km / h.
The carriage of the ML-20 cannon was recognized as normalized, received the designation 52-L-504A and was used in the modernization of the 122-mm A-19 cannon.
For transportation of ML-20 heavy tracked artillery tractors "Voroshilovets" and "Comintern", which were produced by the Kharkov steam locomotive plant, were used.
"Voroshilovets"
"Comintern"
The "Stalinist" also carried it quite successfully.
For the first time ML-20 was used during the battles on the Khalkhin-Gol River. The gun was actively used in the Soviet-Finnish war, where it was successfully used to destroy pillboxes and bunkers on the Mannerheim Line.
ML-20 participated in all major operations of the Great Patriotic War, played an important role in the Battle of Kursk, being one of the few guns capable of effectively fighting the new well-armored German tanks and self-propelled guns. The experience of the front-line use of the ML-20 showed that it was the best Soviet weapon for counter-battery firing.
It is interesting that the first shot at Germany, fired on August 2, 1944, was made precisely from the ML-20.
Tactical and technical characteristics:
Years of issue: 1937-1946
Produced, pcs: 6 884
Calculation, people: 9
Weight in firing position, kg: 7 270
Mass in the stowed position, kg: 7 930
Shooting angles:
- elevations, degrees: from -2 to +60
- horizontal, city: 58
Initial projectile velocity, m / s: 655
Rate of fire, rds / min: 3-4
Firing range, m: 17230
Towing speed on the highway, km / h: up to 20
Like any significant weapon of the Red Army, the ML-20 was "planted" on a tank chassis. The first examples of this symbiosis were SU-152. These machines were produced only in 1943. From February to December 1943, to be precise. And they were a system based on the KV-1S tank. 670 such SUs were produced.
In November 1943, it was decided to "transplant" the ML-20 to another chassis, based on the IS-1 tank. This system is known as ISU-152. It was produced not only during the war, but also after. The release was completed at the end of 1946, although supplies to the troops were made even in 1947. A total of 2,790 vehicles were produced.
There was also another car. ISU-152 mod. 1945 of the year. The machine is experimental. In metal it was produced in a single copy. It differed from the standard ISU-152 chassis. The IS-3 chassis was used. Most likely, this sample should have "hit" the Americans along with the IS-3 at the parade in Berlin.
We will not describe this car. But, for those who are interested in self-propelled guns, we will inform you that the ISU-152, even in the versions ISU-152-1 or ISU 152-2, is a completely new machine. With powerful armor, a new howitzer-gun ML-20SM and other innovations.
In the conclusion of the article, I would like to say about my own feelings from this weapon. Analyzing the design features or combat use of the ML-20, you experience a constant sense of the greatness of this weapon. It is overwhelming. Power and genius in metal. Yes, in some museums the authors of the exposition try to "dilute" this feeling with grass, peaceful landscapes, but it does not go away.
In general, the weapon turned out to be really great. Great in its own place. And exploitation in many armies of the world only confirms this statement.
The weapon that struck the Reich first! The first weapon of retribution for the destruction and death that our country suffered in the Great Patriotic War.
