It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

The new Russian dual self-propelled gun-howitzer!!!

page: 2
1
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 4 2007 @ 11:52 PM
link   
In my Russian weapons updated thread I posted another pic of this artillery system

www.belowtopsecret.com...

Don't know if you guy have or have not seen that pic before, but on this thread, you guys don't have this picture




posted on Apr, 5 2007 @ 09:28 AM
link   
I'd really like to know if this is nothing more than a Photoshop or a project that the Russians are working on. Anyone find any new details on this piece of artillery?



posted on May, 1 2007 @ 02:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by Impreza
I'd really like to know if this is nothing more than a Photoshop or a project that the Russians are working on. Anyone find any new details on this piece of artillery?


From the amount of pictures I have seen, and the fact that they all seem to be exactly the same (no variations you would normally see if multiple photoshopped pictures were made of the same vehicle), I would say it probably isn't a photoshopped picture. Though, I am with you in wanting to know more.



posted on May, 1 2007 @ 03:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by SwitchbladeNGC
From the amount of pictures I have seen, and the fact that they all seem to be exactly the same (no variations you would normally see if multiple photoshopped pictures were made of the same vehicle), I would say it probably isn't a photoshopped picture.


perversely - that is EXACTLY the evidence that indicates to me that it is photoshoped , if it was reall - there would be ALL angles pictures IMHO


Though, I am with you in wanting to know more.


bottom line - if it is real - why has jane`s not made a single report on it ?



posted on May, 2 2007 @ 09:26 AM
link   
Apparently it is called 'Koalitcia-SV', or Coalition-SV. I found a few websites about it.

Here and here



posted on May, 6 2007 @ 01:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by ignorant_ape
bottom line - if it is real - why has jane`s not made a single report on it ?


thanks man, that one made my day



posted on Jun, 15 2007 @ 10:15 AM
link   
From what I have found out, this is the COALITION-SV (Coalitsiya-SV) twin barreled MSTA-S 2S19M modification.

It is currently undergoing trials and will definitely be accepted into the Russian military in the near future. There will also be a variant of the COALITION-SV (NATO reporting name) for naval use most likely to be mounted on a destroyer/frigate or a cruiser.

I'll try to find some more out about it as I can.



posted on Jul, 9 2007 @ 08:39 PM
link   

CONCLUSION:
Typical 'only from a Russian' Tzar Pushkan mentality. If they were refighting the Great War or had some serious expectation for not being able to exploit MRL/NCW, it _still_ wouldn't be justified on the basis of mobility, sustainable fires or probable caliber/munition effects on the firing compartment and tube reliabilities.

Modern War either needs more range and after-fire loiter to handle truly dangerous targets 'one vs. one' as counterbattery. Or greater ability to get to a primitive fight without complex deployment factors stress on the logistics.

Are you sure it's not P-Shopped?


Twice the firepower of MSTA, twice the fire rate, choice of mixed munitions in a single salvo, all for the price of a modest weight increase considering the base weight of the original MSTA.

Heavy artillery at its best in my opinion.

As to mobility, Akatsiya is the fast middle weight and Gvozdika is the light air mobile solution.

Increased stress on the recoil system? Note that in this picture both barrels use independent they are just inverted;

img443.imageshack.us...

Survivability of self-propelled artillery on the modern battlefield? They are never fielded by them selves, but work in conjunction with all other forces, and are well protected.

Firepower of 152mm is unquestionable. Cost of shells verses smart munitions simply makes artillery a logical choice for most targets.

To this day artillery has its advantages to MLRS/GRAD, and will be fielded for decades to come.

Conclusion:

Russians enjoy the luxury of fielding outstanding self-propelled artillery systems in every weight class, all of them being fast auto-loaders which repeatedly proved them selves in combat.



posted on Jul, 9 2007 @ 11:43 PM
link   
Not to be rude, but out of curiosity:

What are the advantages to an MRLS-system?

How have any of these 'artillery' pieces, modern ones, mind you, been proven in battle? I wouldn't exactly call Chechnya 'proven', since that'd be the equivalent of the United States saying, 'Our MLRS has managed to blast a hole in the Al Qaida Camp! It has proven effective against camels and men armed with AK's!'



posted on Jul, 10 2007 @ 04:02 AM
link   

What are the advantages to an MRLS-system?


MLRS basic load – 12 M26 tactical rockets loaded in two pods.

Full 12 rocket load is fired with in 60 seconds.

MLRS is a self-loading, self-propelled launcher/loader designed to launch 12 tactical M26 in 60 seconds. 12 rockets are loaded in two pods. As a tactical weapon system, its main purpose is shoot and scoot in order to avoid detection/counter strike by the enemy forces.

Under optimum conditions, M270 loads, arms and ripple fires 12 rockets every 5 minutes.

Basic M-26 rocket holds 644 DPICM bomblets designed to defeat soft and lightly armored targets.

MSTA rof is 8 rounds per minute from 50 on board rounds, which = to 40 rounds every 5 minutes.

Of the ground rof is 6-7 rounds per minute, or 30-35 rounds every 5 minutes sustained for as long as there is ammunition.

Ammo varies from laser guided, HE-FRAG, cluster, jammers, etc. Auto loader can load projectiles up to 45kg.

A single MSTA continuously puts 2 tons of munitions on target every 5 minutes.

MLRS loaded with M26 puts 2.4 tons during the same 5 minutes, but each rocket weights 296 kg verses 45 kg for each 152mm shell.

Main advantage of MSTA to MLRS is higher sustained rate of fire, larger ammunition capacity, and MUCH cheaper ammunition which can be continuously delivered/loaded by conventional transportation (trucks). All this amounts to firm battle ground presence and dense fire density, while MLRS releases all of its firepower and then relocates out of the area of operations to rearm.

Some links on MSTA;

www.army-guide.com...

www.army-technology.com...

www.rbs.ru...


Since there were question about its speed and mobility, here’s a great video of this thing tearing it up all over the place. As they say, a picture tells a thousand words;

www.youtube.com...

I loved how this thing forged a river. Unbelievable.

Also great shots of the autoloader in action, both internal and of the ground.

Considering twin barrels of Koalitcia-SV, it is reasonable to think that its rof will be twice that of the MSTA-S, and if it is actually so, then it will be able to put over 3 tons of a shells on a target in 5 minutes continuously, or deliver 2 tons in two and a half minutes.

That’s twice as fast as MLRS.

Sure as hell worth the extra weight in my opinion.

[quote]How have any of these 'artillery' pieces, modern ones, mind you, been proven in battle? I wouldn't exactly call Chechnya 'proven', since that'd be the equivalent of the United States saying, 'Our MLRS has managed to blast a hole in the Al Qaida Camp! It has proven effective against camels and men armed with AK's!'

Proven in battle means that any given weapon meat design specifications under full combat conditions.

MSTA did just that in Chechnya, it performed just as it was designed to.

It got where it needed to, and provided continues fire power with out malfunctions.

MLRS did the same in Iraq. They successfully fired their missiles.

Considering the current stage of evolution, M109A6 paladin on the other hand did not perform well. It suffers from misfires, heavy contamination of the crew compartment with sand from gun blast during sustained fire, and being a semi-auto loader, sand contamination requires heavy maintenance and down time, all of which greatly reduces effectiveness do to crew fatigue.

Another video to make a point;

www.youtube.com...

While putting aside stupid antics of the guys firing the gun, note the difference in automation between MSTA and Paladin.

Manual priming of the Paladin is what casing the misfires.

All Russians have to do is take care of the automated firing sequence until the 50 rounds are up, and from that point loading is done by throwing shells and charges right on the conveyor chain.

Gun loading, priming, etc is done completely automatically.

Paladin is completely outdated, while Koalitcia-SV is promising to become the hardest hitting self-propelled piece.



posted on Jul, 10 2007 @ 03:21 PM
link   
Wow!! a double barreld mobile howitzer!!!! Damn that will hit the enemy hard.

Iskander, what is your opinion at the PzH 2000 SPH? Because it is in service in my country (the Netherlands)

Here wikipedia info iff necesary:

PzH 2000

Here is the SPH that should have replaced the M109 Paladin:
The XM2001 Crusader SPH.

But unfortianly the project was stopped.

Wikipedia linkie: XM2001 Crusader

I would like to see some more pictures off this highly unusual super howitzer because man this looks mean!!



posted on Jun, 13 2008 @ 04:07 PM
link   
ive dug up some info on the coalition-sv and the final production variant is supposedly going to be mounted on the new t-95 tank chassis . i fount this on btvt.narod.ru . if this thing does actually enter service it will without a doubt be the best sph in the world.
for exampe the basic 2s19 msta is already considered by many european, russian and american(yes i said american) military experts as just as good as any other modern sph and it even surpasses them in most circumstances.



posted on Jun, 14 2008 @ 04:46 AM
link   
I am surprised! I have not seen any of Propaganda members say something like… "Well it is nice machine... but Russia has no money to mass produce it!" or... "Well America does not need something like that... We got Space Cannons... ha beat that damn Russkies"



In any case... back to the topic... I wonder what electronics it got inside... how well it is integrated with other battle systems in real time... that is what matters these days...

China will love them... coughcough...



posted on Jun, 19 2008 @ 05:39 AM
link   
reply to post by Russian soldier
 


Russian soldier, eh? So, you CAN read this article:
btvt.narod.ru...



new topics

top topics



 
1
<< 1   >>

log in

join