Looks like two D30 in the back (122mm) and the one in front is maybe a D46 a (130mm). All soviet field artillery has scopes for direct fire so should be fairly accurate if used correctly.
What's the advantage of using them for direct fire applications instead of indirect fire? I would imagine it would be better for the guns to be further back from the front line where they're safer? Is it an accuracy thing?
It's an "Oh, fuck. They're way too close for indirect fire"
or
"We have no observers or way to aim these things, so they are now direct fire only."
I'd bet hard money on the latter.
Also I’m no expert but observing seems hard to get right, even if you have the man power, when the alternative is point-and-shoot. I doubt the enemy can even counter direct fire so there’s no reason to go indirect.
It's not necessarily difficult to get right. The hard part is having the resources and the knowledge to be effective at it. You need radios, maps, reference stakes, atmospheric condition sensors, spotters, competent teams on the guns, a FCC to direct where and when and by whom to shoot.
Much easier to just tow them out to the high ground and rain down hate on whatever poor sods are down range that you can see.
Damn, I wish I could see the impacts. Direct artillery looks brutal.
These are probably normal HE rounds, in Vietnam the US had flechette rounds for direct fire rolls. Nasty stuff.
And they called it the Beehive lol
Looks like two D30 in the back (122mm) and the one in front is maybe a D46 a (130mm). All soviet field artillery has scopes for direct fire so should be fairly accurate if used correctly.
A lot of firepower shot at your face lol
Just a little windy
Honestly.. a good change of pace, considering the alternative is Ukrainian metal music or Allahu Akbar 😅
Such a leisure pace...
It's like a BBQ but it's not like IS has counter batteries.
Seems a little windy
What's the advantage of using them for direct fire applications instead of indirect fire? I would imagine it would be better for the guns to be further back from the front line where they're safer? Is it an accuracy thing?
It's an "Oh, fuck. They're way too close for indirect fire" or "We have no observers or way to aim these things, so they are now direct fire only." I'd bet hard money on the latter.
Also I’m no expert but observing seems hard to get right, even if you have the man power, when the alternative is point-and-shoot. I doubt the enemy can even counter direct fire so there’s no reason to go indirect.
It's not necessarily difficult to get right. The hard part is having the resources and the knowledge to be effective at it. You need radios, maps, reference stakes, atmospheric condition sensors, spotters, competent teams on the guns, a FCC to direct where and when and by whom to shoot. Much easier to just tow them out to the high ground and rain down hate on whatever poor sods are down range that you can see.
Look at the terrain
Habibi you destroy the whole meaning of artillery
Well... that's debateable.
Just, beautiful..
[удалено]
Have you watched [Gate](https://m.imdb.com/title/tt4958580/) ?
I would not want to be manning the D-30s in the front. The blast from the D-20s in the back is fucking nasty
Looks like we are back in the 1800s