The M-30 howitzer is probably known to everyone. The famous and legendary weapon of the workers 'and peasants', Soviet, Russian and many other armies. Any documentary about the Great Patriotic War almost necessarily includes footage of the firing of an M-30 battery. Even today, despite its age, this weapon is in service in many armies of the world.
And by the way, 80 years, as it were …
So, today we will talk about the M-30 122-mm howitzer of the 1938 model. About the howitzer, which many artillery experts call the era. And foreign experts are the most widespread weapon in the history of artillery (about 20 thousand units). The system, where the old, tested by many years of operation of other tools, solutions, and new, previously unknown, were combined in the most organic way.
In the article preceding this publication, we talked about the most numerous howitzer of the Red Army of the pre-war period - the 122-mm howitzer of the 1910/30 model. It was this howitzer that in the second year of the war was replaced by the number of M-30. According to various sources, in 1942, the number of M-30 was already greater than its predecessor.
There are a lot of materials about the creation of the system. Literally all the nuances of the competitive struggle of different design bureaus, the tactical and technical characteristics of the guns, design features, and so on are sorted out. The points of view of the authors of such articles are sometimes diametrically opposed.
I would not like to analyze all the details of such disputes. Therefore, we will mark the historical part of the narration with a dotted line, leaving the readers the right to their own opinion on this issue. The opinion of the authors is just one of many and cannot serve as the only correct and final one.
So, the 122-mm howitzer of the 1910/30 model was outdated by the mid-30s. That "minor modernization", which was carried out in 1930, only extended the life of this system, but did not return it to its youth and functionality. That is, the tool could still serve, the whole question is how. The niche of divisional howitzers would soon be empty. And everyone understood this. The command of the Red Army, the leaders of the state and the designers of the artillery systems themselves.
In 1928, a rather heated discussion on this issue even unfolded after the publication of an article in the Journal of the Artillery Committee. Disputes were conducted in all directions. From combat use and the design of guns, to the necessary and sufficient caliber of howitzers. Based on the experience of the First World War, several calibers were considered at once, from 107 to 122 mm.
The assignment for the development of an artillery system to replace the outdated divisional howitzer was received by the designers on August 11, 1929. In studies on the caliber of the howitzer, there is no unequivocal answer about the choice of 122 mm. The authors lean towards the simplest and most logical explanation.
The Red Army had enough ammunition of this particular caliber. Moreover, the country had the opportunity to produce these ammunition in the required quantity at existing factories. And third, the logistics of delivering ammunition was simplified as much as possible. The most numerous howitzer (model 1910/30) and the new howitzer could be supplied "from one box".
It makes no sense to describe the problems in the "birth" and preparation for mass production of the M-30 howitzer. This is perfectly described in the "Encyclopedia of Russian Artillery", probably the most authoritative historian of artillery A. B. Shirokorad.
The tactical and technical requirements for a new divisional howitzer were announced by the Red Army Artillery Directorate in September 1937. The requirements are quite stringent. Especially in the part of the shutter. AU required a wedge gate (promising and having great potential for modernization). Engineers and designers, however, understood that this system was not reliable enough.
Three design bureaus were involved in the development of the howitzer: the Ural Machine-Building Plant (Uralmash), the Molotov Plant No. 172 (Motovilikha, Perm), and the Gorky Plant No. 92 (Nizhny Novgorod Machine-Building Plant).
The samples of howitzers presented by these factories were quite interesting. But the Ural development (U-2) was significantly inferior to the Gorky (F-25) and Perm (M-30) in ballistics. Therefore, it was not considered promising.
Howitzer U-2
Howitzer F-25 (with a high probability)
We will consider some of the performance characteristics of the F-25 / M-30.
Barrel length, mm: 2800/2800
Rate of fire, in / min: 5-6 / 5-6
The initial velocity of the projectile, m / s: 510/515
VN angle, degree: -5 … + 65 / -3 … + 63
Firing range, m: 11780/11800
Ammunition, index, weight: OF-461, 21, 76
Weight in firing position, kg: 1830/2450
Calculation, people: 8/8
Issued, pcs: 17/19 266
It is not by chance that we have given some of the performance characteristics in one table. It is in this version that the main advantage of the F-25 is clearly visible - the weight of the gun. Agree, the difference of more than half a ton is impressive. And, probably, it was this fact that became the main one in Shirokorad's definition of this design as the best. The mobility of such a system is undeniably higher. It is a fact.
True, there is a "buried dog" here too, in our opinion. The M-30s provided for testing were somewhat lighter than the serial ones. Therefore, the gap in the mass was not so noticeable.
The question arises about the decision taken. Why M-30? Why not a lighter F-25.
The first and main version was announced on March 23, 1939 in the same "Journal of the Artillery Committee" No. 086: the range and military tests of the M-30 howitzer, more powerful than the F-25, have been completed."
Agree, such a statement at that time puts a lot in its place. There is a howitzer. The howitzer has been tested and there is nothing more to spend the people's money on the development of a weapon that no one needs. The continuation of further work in this direction was fraught with the risk of the designers "moving to some sharashka" with the help of the NKVD.
By the way, the authors in this regard agree with some researchers on the issue of installing on the M-30 not a wedge, but a good old piston valve. Most likely, the designers went for a direct violation of the AU requirements precisely because of the reliability of the piston valve.
Problems with the semi-automatic wedge breechblock at that time were also observed with smaller caliber guns. For example, the F-22, a universal divisional 76 mm gun.
Winners are not judged. Although, this is which side to look at. Of course they took risks. In November 1936, BA Berger, head of the Motovilikha plant design bureau, was arrested and sentenced to 5 years in prison, a similar fate befell the leading designer of the 152-mm ML-15 howitzer-gun AA Ploskirev in January of the following year.
After this, the desire of developers to use a piston valve, already tested and debugged in production, is understandable in order to avoid possible accusations of sabotage in the event of problems with its wedge-type design.
And there is one more nuance. The lower weight of the F-25 howitzer was provided by the machine and the carriage of the 76-mm cannon in comparison with the competitors. The gun was more mobile, but had a smaller resource due to the "flimsy" gun carriage. It is quite natural that a 122 mm projectile gave a completely different recoil momentum than a 76 mm one. The muzzle brake, apparently, at that time did not provide a proper impulse reduction.
Obviously, the lighter and more mobile F-25 preferred the more durable and more durable M-30.
By the way, we found further confirmation of this hypothesis in the fate of the M-30. We often write that constructively successful field guns were soon "transplanted" to already used or captured chassis and continued to fight as an SPG. The same fate awaited the M-30.
Parts of the M-30 were used in the creation of the SU-122 (on the captured StuG III chassis and on the T-34 chassis). However, the cars turned out to be unsuccessful. The M-30, for all its might, turned out to be quite heavy. The column mount of weapons on the SU-122 took up a lot of space in the fighting compartment of the ACS, creating significant inconvenience to the crew. The large forward reach of the recoil devices with their armor made it difficult to see from the driver's seat and did not allow a full-fledged hatch hole for him to be placed on the front plate.
But most importantly, the base of a medium tank was too fragile for such a powerful weapon.
The use of this system was abandoned. But the attempts did not end there. In particular, in one of the variants of the now famous airborne self-propelled gun "Violet", it was the M-30 that was used. But they preferred a universal 120-mm gun.
The second disadvantage for the F-25 could just be its smaller mass in combination with the already mentioned muzzle brake.
The lighter the weapon, the better its chances of being used to directly support one's forces with fire.
By the way, it was in such a role at the beginning of the Great Patriotic War that the M-30, which was poorly suited for such purposes, played more than once or twice. Not from a good life, of course.
Naturally, the powder gases deflected by the muzzle brake, raising dust, sand, soil particles or snow, will more easily give out the position of the F-25 compared to the M-30. Yes, and when firing from closed positions at a short distance from the front line at a low elevation angle, the possibility of such unmasking should be considered. Someone at AU might well have taken all this into account.
Now directly about the design of the howitzer. Structurally, it consists of the following elements:
- a barrel with a free pipe, a casing that covers the pipe approximately to the middle, and a screw-on breech;
- a piston valve opening to the right. The shutter was closed and opened by turning the handle. In the bolt, a percussion mechanism with a linearly moving striker, a helical mainspring and a rotary hammer was mounted, for cocking and lowering the striker, the hammer was pulled back by the trigger cord. Ejection of the spent cartridge case from the chamber was carried out when the shutter was opened with an ejector in the form of a cranked lever. There was a safety mechanism that prevented premature unlocking of the bolt during prolonged shots;
- a gun carriage, which included a cradle, recoil devices, an upper machine, aiming mechanisms, a counterbalancing mechanism, a lower machine with sliding box-shaped beds, combat travel and suspension, sights and shield cover.
The yoke-type cradle was laid with trunnions in the slots of the upper machine.
The recoil devices included a hydraulic recoil brake (under the barrel) and a hydropneumatic knurler (above the barrel).
The upper machine was inserted with a pin into the socket of the lower machine. The shock absorber of the pin with springs ensured the suspended position of the upper machine relative to the lower one and facilitated its rotation. On the left side of the upper machine, a screw rotary mechanism was mounted, on the right - a sector lifting mechanism.
Fighting course - with two wheels, shoe brakes, disconnectable transverse leaf spring. Suspension was turned off and on automatically when the beds were extended and moved.
Sights included a gun-independent sight (with two arrows) and a Hertz panorama.
There are still many blank spots in the history of this legendary howitzer. The story continues. Contradictory, in many ways incomprehensible, but history. The brainchild of the design team under the leadership of F. F. Petrov is so harmonious that it still serves. Moreover, it perfectly fit not only into rifle formations, but also into tank, mechanized and motorized units.
And not only in our army in the past, but also in the present. More than two dozen countries continue to have the M-30 in service. Which indicates that the gun succeeded more than.
Having taken part in almost all wars, starting with the Second World War, the M-30 proved its reliability and unpretentiousness, having received the highest rating from Marshal of Artillery GF Odintsov: "There can be nothing better than it."
Of course it can.
After all, all the best that was in the M-30 howitzer was embodied in the 122 mm D-30 (2A18) howitzer, which became a worthy successor to the M-30. But of course, there will be a separate conversation about it.
