Military Review

SAU "Coalition-SV", "Coalition-SV-KSh". Logical conclusions

113
SAU "Coalition-SV", "Coalition-SV-KSh". Logical conclusions

For the first time, it became known back in 2006 about a promising Russian self-propelled artillery installation being developed within the framework of the "Coalition-SV" theme. The site already has several articles on this topic, but I would like to talk in more detail about this project and the latest the news about him.


Немного stories
The concept of twin artillery systems originated almost at the beginning of the 20th century. Work in the USSR was actively conducted in the 70s. But technical difficulties due to insufficiently developed technologies did not allow to fully realize the plan. The first domestic incarnation of such a machine was the “product 327”, the main developer of which was Uraltransmash FSUE, the crew of this product was in an isolated fighting compartment in the bow of the hull, while the fighting compartment with a fully mechanized ammunition was in the central part of the modified chassis the main tank T-72 But this idea came to the mind of Russian designers again. The lead contractor is: FSUE Central Research Institute "Petrel" (Nizhny Novgorod). Co-executors: FSUE Uraltransmash, FSUE TsNIIM, FSUE Uralvagonzavod
2С35 "Coalition-SV" is a Russian project of a double-barreled self-propelled artillery installation of a class of self-propelled howitzers.

The location of the crew members' jobs in the armored control module eliminates the ingress of powder gases from the shot. The crew is isolated from the weapons module.

Jobs crew members are located in a computerized control module, which is located in the nose of the chassis. The crew, consisting of 2-3-x people, has complete control over the processes of loading, targeting and firing. The control module is equipped with airborne tactical systems for selecting a target, positioning and navigation. According to the indications of instruments and sensors, the crew constantly monitors the general condition of the vehicle and the amount of ammunition by type of shots.

Each workplace of crew members is equipped with a complex of remote control of automated fire and instrument control of all operations on the displays with a single information command system. The information and control channels for communication of crew jobs in the control module with the weapon module are duplicated. The main hatches of the crew, an evacuation hatch, as well as a technological hatch of the passage to the weapon module are provided.

Installing the control module in the forward part of the hull allows you to place the crew in the least dangerous place of the combat vehicle.

Detailed scheme of SAU "Coalition-SV"

The main armament is located in the turret, where a paired artillery mount and ammunition with a mechanized charging system are installed. The engine is located in the rear of the machine.
The tasks of such an ACS: hit any ground objects at a distance of 70 km. Work in the “Flurry of Squall” mode (English Multiple Rounds Simultaneous Impact, simultaneous hit of several projectiles) Have quick preparations for firing, as well as change positions within 1 minutes.

On this model, the layout of the crew, as well as the structure of the tower.



Working model of SAU "Coalition-SV"


A very interesting version of this ACS is the articulated version. The first section in it is the self-propelled gun itself, but the second, in fact, is a transport-loading machine for more than 200 shots.

From the engine located in the first section, the power flow is transmitted to the second. Due to the presence of the second body, the damping time of the oscillations after the shot is significantly reduced. In addition, the permeability on the ground increases dramatically.


Articulated version

But there is also an option and a charging machine on a wheeled platform.

Generalized structure.

Perspective self-propelled artillery "Coalition-SV" for installation on surface ships.


In general, there is a mass of information on this topic. At the beginning of 2010, the Minister of Defense of the Russian Federation stated that the project was not funded by the state, since the Coalition-SV was not included in the priority samples of military equipment, but no official statements were made about the complete cessation of work.

Despite the statements made by the Minister of Defense of the Russian Federation in 2010, the work on the topic “Coalition-SV” continues. In addition, in 2011, the stage of production of working design documentation for the wheeled and tracked versions of the system, as well as the transport-charging machine for them, was to be completed.

The latest news
The news of the end of 2012 of the year. At the same time, tank expert, editor-in-chief of the branch magazine Arsenal of the Fatherland, Viktor Murakhovsky, noted that the Coalition-SV artillery unit would fit the Armata tank chassis much better than the T-90 chassis.

“Armata” is, after all, a new generation of equipment, both in terms of engine, transmission, and chassis, that is, everything that will be used for the Coalition. “Armata” has chassis bearing capacity - 30, it is much higher than T-90, ”Murakhovsky explained.

The representative of the Federal State Unitary Enterprise TsNII "Petrel" also said that the tracked platform is more stable when firing than the wheeled platform, and does not require the extension of supports. At the same time, he did not rule out that in connection with the transition to the wheeled platforms, the Ground Forces would need Coalitions on wheels.

“We expect that after choosing the platform, the Coalition will become the main artillery system, displacing Mstu-S, Akatsion and other installations of the 152 mm caliber,” said the Burevestnik representative. Installations "Coalition-SV", in 2013 year to pass production tests, and in 2014 year - state tests. At the same time, the Msta-S installations, which are now rearming the army, will become morally obsolete by the year of 2020.

"Coalition-SV-KSh"

OJSC KAMAZ unveiled 3D-models of the developed promising self-propelled 152-mm artillery complex on a wheelbase, created as part of the Coalition-SV-KSh development work.

The image of a three-dimensional model was published on his blog by Denis Mokrushin. "Today, within the framework of the ROC" Coalition-SV-KSh ", work is underway to create self-propelled artillery weapons on the wheeled vehicle base. For the base of the selected chassis from the family of high-performance cars KAMAZ-6560. After carrying out special modifications to the chassis to match the transport base with the approved technical requirements, a prototype chassis was made and sent to the company where the advanced 152-mm artillery system will be mounted, ”wrote blogger Denis Mokrushin on his page in LiveJournal.

"This is a picture of the 3D model in the first development of the 152-mm artillery system. The prototype will be slightly different. The final version of the model is not yet. The sample and additional information may be by the end of the year," he added.

And just recently a very interesting news appeared: “Experimental thermoelectrochemical artillery mounts were tested in Russia. The gun is one and a half times longer than traditional gun mounts in range.

“Instead of hexogen, a much higher density substance was used in the gun. It exploded with the help of plasma initiation - a special discharge. Due to the high density, the detonation speed is also higher than conventional explosives, and due to the use of plasma, in addition to kinetic energy, an electromagnetic pulse acts on the projectile, ”said an OPK employee.

Experimental artillery mounts were developed at the Petrel Research Institute on the basis of a reinforced 152-millimeter twin-barreled self-propelled X-NUMX-XNNXX “Coalition-SV” self-propelled gun. According to the representative of the military-industrial complex, the tests were of a scientific nature, and the possibility of finalizing the weapon for use in the troops is now being discussed.

The Russian Defense Ministry explained that several types of weapons were being created at once on new physical principles, but the creation of a thermoelectrochemical instrument was not ordered by the department. “If the industry offers it to us, demonstrates and proves that it is much more efficient than what we use now, then we will certainly consider the option of replacement. But so far there have been no such proposals, ”the representative of the Ministry of Defense said. The declared range of the gun is 70 kilometers.

Some conclusions
What we have? The ACS on the T-90 or Armata tracked platform, which has an uninhabited fighting compartment with a fully mechanized combat module, the crew is in an armored capsule with modern target designation systems, positioning, fire control systems, etc. The ACS has a thermoelectric paired double-barreled gun with a rate of fire above 15 shots per minute (there were data that reached 23 shots per minute in critical mode, though this can only last for the first minute salvo) and a range of up to 70 km, with very fast combat readiness and changing positions. In general, such a technique can be talked about for a long time.

But from the very beginning, the Ministry of Defense is trying to ignore this artillery system, in 2010 declaring that it is not financing, and that this is supposedly not a priority area. I would very much like to ask the MoD what is the priority in artillery, right? The answer is: "Coalition-SV-KSh". About this so to say the miracle of technology, I wrote above. They took the platform KAMAZ-6560, and put the combat module on it. And what can you say about such a layout? The 152-mm gun (from MSTA-C seems to) unfolds to the starboard or port side, and the supports of the machine itself and the guns are laid out. How long does it take? What can be said about a quick change of position with such a "cuttlefish"? The principle of loading this complex? Its cross? I have repeatedly read that there is simply a problem of deformation and damage to the KAMAZ chassis in just a few shots ... The rate of fire of this “super weapon”? Range? Dozens of questions ...

My opinion is that Russia does not need such artillery as a "Coalition-SV-KSh", just like Serdyukov's "Lynx" and so on ... The prospects are small, according to some characteristics of the available Soviet SAU will lose. And you, dear readers of the site, what do you think about the ACS "Coalition-SV", "Coalition-SV-KSh" and in general what our country needs now? Unless SV-KSh did not cut money and other flowing?

Characteristics of SAU "Coalition-SV"

Mass, tons <55
Chassis Unification based on a promising platform.
Caliber, mm 2X152 (155)
Barrel length <52
Ammunition Shells <70 Charges * <300
Loading Auto.
Rate of fire, rpm / min More than 15
Fire range <60 km
Flurry of Fire (MRSI) +
Crew Up to 3
TZM +

Information sources:
http://www.arms-expo.ru,
http://pro-tank.ru,
http://www.i-mash.ru
Author:
113 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Skarte
    Skarte 20 May 2013 08: 20 New
    +7
    according to the description, a pretty good thing, even a very ... sau, the main thing is to produce the maximum number of shots and change the position so as not to be covered with a retaliatory strike ... if you compare on a caterpillar and wheeled chassis, then the Coalition-SV self-propelled guns wins, by the number volleys and the rate of change of position is higher than that of the wheeled counterpart ... it’s interesting for Coalition-SV what the delay between shots is, it’s unlikely that it can scamper from 2 barrels at once (at the same time), and if we assume that the difference between shots will be less a couple of seconds, then the probability of covering the enemy is much higher than that of the same Coalition-SV-KSh ... it’s just as interesting which ones there are when using the double-barreled scheme, as you know there is nothing perfect ... but still, my personal opinion very useful thing
    1. Explore
      Explore 20 May 2013 20: 53 New
      +5
      At one of the forums (it seems on DIVERSION), one person allegedly associated with the ROC of ARMATA stated that the MoE had abandoned the double-barrel Coalition-SV in favor of its single-barrel version in order to unify it and the possibility of installing it on any type of platform (from Armata to Kamaz )
      I'm afraid you can say goodbye to a double-barreled shotgun ...
      1. Lopatov
        Lopatov 20 May 2013 20: 56 New
        +4
        Quote: Explorar
        I'm afraid you can say goodbye to a double-barreled shotgun ...

        Better to say, "fortunately"
        1. Civil
          Civil 20 May 2013 21: 00 New
          +1
          But will there be a unified marine option?
          1. Lopatov
            Lopatov 20 May 2013 21: 10 New
            +1
            They say that sailors are not particularly enthusiastic. But it’s better to ask them.
            The best thing about this topic is by no means an incomprehensible double-barreled shotgun, but modular loading, which has long been asked for serial samples. And sailors, in theory, do not really need this.
            1. krot00f
              krot00f 21 May 2013 13: 29 New
              +5
              Why are you, you don’t really need it, Few of their towers exploded, because of capes. Yes, the fleet is ONLY a unitary shot, and also the automation is such that after a misfire it throws out of the gun. And 130 caliber maximum because of this. And unification with self-propelled guns is a chatter from the very beginning. And then in the fleet for a long time 2 AK-130 barrels.
        2. Explore
          Explore 20 May 2013 21: 26 New
          +1
          Although besides the rate of fire I don’t see the special advantages of a double-barreled shotgun ... But why is it direct “FOR HAPPINESS”? Why do you not like her so much?
          1. Lopatov
            Lopatov 20 May 2013 23: 18 New
            +2
            Rate of fire at the cost of increased dispersion? This is not MLRS. Two barrels in a single block, shoot in turn, this will not give a special jerk. Well, one more per minute. Reason to re-complicate the car? 15 per minute bourgeois and one barrel do
      2. igor.borov775
        igor.borov775 21 May 2013 10: 31 New
        0
        Yes, interesting details, But I don’t think that something will be built, They will make a sample and they’ll probably take it, Understand me correctly MSTA-S will also upgrade to such a firing range, especially since the Japanese already have such ones abroad, for example, the Coalition must block these achievements only then pay attention to it, And do not forget our generals, they should be interested in such a product, Moreover, this weapon is not there over the hill, There is another detail, this product will still require significant financial investments, but we still have problems We may need very large investments, probably even in production, In theory this is a kind of revolution in the barrel artillery, Such moments are very difficult to break their place in the sun, And most importantly, it is very difficult to be the first,
    2. Explore
      Explore 20 May 2013 22: 11 New
      +3
      To the main question of the article - NO, this is not a cut of money, and NO, this is not the lobbyism of the "great-slaves" of Kamaz.
      This is, first and foremost, the demand of the military itself, and without knowing it, do not whine about cuts. Although thanks for the pictures.
      Let me explain.
      Moscow Region plans to introduce three types of brigades on similar platforms.
      1. Light teams. Mobile (though in the operational plan, since mobility on the battlefield can be forgotten - drowning in the nearest river, stuck in the nearest field) connections exclusively at the automobile base - Typhoon trucks (unified modular Kamaz and Urals), medium Wolf armored vehicles (Tiger reincarnation) and possibly light BBM Scorpio, as a replacement for UAZ. It is logical that the artillery is either towed or self-propelled guns on a car chassis. I prefer the second option.
      2. Middle brigades. Relatively / limitedly mobile connections depending on the theater of operations having either tracked vehicles (Kurganets-25 platform) or wheeled (Boomerang platform). Accordingly, artillery is also likely to be based on them. Like most service cars.
      3. Heavy brigades. Shock formations on a tank chassis (Armata heavy tracked platform). Escort, support and self-propelled guns on this chassis.
      1. malkor
        malkor 20 May 2013 23: 29 New
        0
        For the first time I hear about such plans, thanks for the information. there is something to think about.
      2. Dream_w
        Dream_w 6 March 2015 09: 50 New
        0
        Thanks for the clarification.
  2. Canep
    Canep 20 May 2013 08: 26 New
    +3
    KamAZ OJSC has unveiled 3D models of a promising self-propelled 152-mm wheeled artillery system being developed as part of the Coalition-SV-KSh development project.
    The outriggers are not located correctly; to ensure circular shelling, the supports should be located at equal distance from the center of rotation of the tower. And on the model, they are strongly biased forward. (students seemed to be drawing) The self-propelled tower is uninhabited +.
    1. Lopatov
      Lopatov 20 May 2013 09: 47 New
      +5
      Quote: Canep
      The outriggers are not located correctly; to ensure circular shelling, the supports should be located at equal distance from the center of rotation of the tower.

      Only if the self-propelled gun has a round fire. What is not a fact
      1. Canep
        Canep 20 May 2013 10: 06 New
        +2
        If the self-propelled guns firing is not circular, then 2 supports are enough, but on the model there are 4 of them.
        1. Lopatov
          Lopatov 20 May 2013 10: 12 New
          +6
          If two, then the restrictions will be not only on the horizon, but also on the elevation angle
    2. carbofo
      carbofo 20 May 2013 13: 59 New
      +3
      If she will shoot aft, then the location of the supports is quite correct.
      If you correctly calculate the point of application of the recoil effort to the support, then in the aft sector, say + -25 degrees, it will hit at full rate of fire at any angle, which I think and would like to do, especially since the crane and layout somehow hint that the trunk is life will look back.
      Given the power of the installation, such a conclusion is natural, well, she will not be able to shoot sideways, she will overturn.
      The only thing that bothers me is the rather light construction of the supports, I think that the opener will be on the face of the car! otherwise the chassis will break.
      1. evg_74
        evg_74 20 May 2013 21: 31 New
        +3
        Gentlemen, explain to me how fast this self-propelled gun will change position ???
        Look at the G6 (South Africa) from WIKI [http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/G6]
        "The time for the self-propelled guns to go into combat position is 60 seconds, and from combat to marching - 30 seconds, which helps to avoid a retaliatory strike during counter-battery fire."
        IMHO: what Kamaz offers is capable of fighting only with the Indians who cannot answer. And in the case of a serious opponent, the life of such an installation is equal to the time of the return strike.
        1. Lopatov
          Lopatov 20 May 2013 23: 22 New
          0
          Quote: evg_74
          what Kamaz offers is capable of fighting only with the Indians who cannot answer. And in the case of a serious opponent, the life of such an installation is equal to the time of the return strike.

          The barrel is zero, the locking mechanism captures it. At this time, the supports rise. Do you think this can’t be done in 30 seconds?
          1. bask
            bask 20 May 2013 23: 43 New
            +1
            Quote: Spade
            the khanism of fastening captures him. At this time, the supports rise. Think in 30 seconds it's not

            KamAZ for 152 mm self-propelled guns is a complete th ...
            You are right if you take the wheelbase only on the BAZ ,, Voshchina ,,
            But the best wheeled chassis for self-propelled guns BAZ-5921 is a three-axle floating chassis of the Bryansk Automobile Plant.

            At GSh Object 216 (3RS-300V)
            The front location of the MTO and the higher carrying capacity of GSH.
            There are no better platforms, and will not be in the near future!
            1. Lopatov
              Lopatov 20 May 2013 23: 46 New
              0
              It depends on what pulls. After all, there’s also a need to reserve a cabin.
          2. carbofo
            carbofo 21 May 2013 07: 56 New
            0
            It’s easy, if you put the “Give the tear” button, which automatically puts the barrel on the marching and fixes its capture, the legs rise in parallel, who remembers how many tanks are laid out in Starcraft?
          3. evg_74
            evg_74 23 May 2013 07: 01 New
            0
            here comes the legs from this development: Semser 122 (self-propelled guns) (for Kazakhstan) [http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semser_122_(CAU)] and here is some description [http: //forum.worldoftanks. com / index.php? / topic / 142313-% D1% 81% D0% B0% D1% 83-semser /
            ] (I apologize for such a site, the first thing Google gave out): "In addition, the usual D-30 field howitzer is fully operational according to the standard in 90 seconds. It takes up to three minutes for the Semser artillery system." that’s actually time = 3 minutes = 180 seconds, but it’s in a combat position, it’s much more interesting when it goes into marching, if you take into account the same proportion as the G6, then 90 seconds to marching.
            It remains to wait for the TTX "Coalition-SV-KSh". and I will be very happy if the transition time to the combat position and marching will be like the G6.
  3. vladsolo56
    vladsolo56 20 May 2013 09: 15 New
    +7
    Here the ambush hastened to put a plus, and when I read to the end I realized that the author was not at all enthusiastic about the Coalition in any form. I like the system so much. If self-propelled artillery is generally needed in the army, then the Coalition is its peak, and it is strange to say that it is not needed. This position is alarming.
    1. carbofo
      carbofo 20 May 2013 14: 04 New
      +2
      Well, the wars that are being waged now are clearly not drawing on those opportunities that the coalition provides, basically no one does raids, they quietly hammer at the shooting points, delivering shells from the ground.
      For modern combined arms combat, there are already different requirements, but the coalition is already better suited for them, only that it is possible to choose a prospect with unclaimed or proven solutions.!?
  4. BARKAS
    BARKAS 20 May 2013 09: 37 New
    +2
    The fact that someone is actively lobbying KAMAZ for a long time is understandable, and they said about the coalition that the barrel must be lowered to send the projectile, but it’s clear from the figure that the trays go up to the combat station, this is all normal.
  5. Lopatov
    Lopatov 20 May 2013 09: 43 New
    +6
    Instead of RDX, a much higher density substance was used in the gun. It exploded using plasma initiation - a special discharge. Due to the high density, the detonation speed is also higher than conventional explosives, and due to the use of plasma, in addition to kinetic energy, an electromagnetic pulse acts on the projectile


    Game. It seems that the functionary heard a ringing, but did not understand. Type of Rogozin.

    Most likely we are talking about a method of initiating a propellant. At the moment, for modular charges, either bushings, an analogue of capsule bushings screwed into sleeves, or a laser, are used. This seems to be the third method. So there is no RDX as a propellant and no electromagnetic pulse, which, unfortunately, will not accelerate the projectile in the barrel either
    1. PLO
      PLO 20 May 2013 13: 39 New
      +2
      Game. It seems that the functionary heard a ringing, but did not understand. Type of Rogozin.

      this is Izvestia in its repertoire
      1. Lopatov
        Lopatov 20 May 2013 15: 01 New
        +2
        Maybe they are. In short, somewhere along the way, the whole point was lost
    2. avdkrd
      avdkrd 20 May 2013 16: 48 New
      +4
      I completely agree. When I read nonsense about hexogen - slowly nonsense. Noble nonsense.
    3. postman
      postman 20 May 2013 17: 25 New
      +2
      Quote: Spade
      Game. It seems that the functionary heard a ringing, but did not understand. Type of Rogozin.

      I didn’t have time ... and about
      Quote: Author
      and due to the use of plasma, in addition to kinetic energy, an electromagnetic impulse acts on the projectile, ”said a defense industrial complex employee.

      = ANALOGUE DIAGNOSIS
    4. Prohor
      Prohor 20 May 2013 22: 35 New
      +2
      Here is such nonsense, I have not heard spawn! lol RDX - propellant BB !!! Detonation with pressure in the front of the shock wave of 300-400 thousand atmospheres - for projectile throwing !!!
      Guys, this is worthy of the Grand Prix of the world idiots contest!
  6. avt
    avt 20 May 2013 09: 44 New
    +3
    I agree with the author - on the basis of KAMAZ there will be a flimsy and thin artillery system, and there will be no special advantages over towed guns, but it will cost more. Tracked platform preferred.
    1. svp67
      svp67 20 May 2013 09: 56 New
      +2
      Quote: avt
      I agree with the author - on the basis of KAMAZ there will be a flimsy and thin artillery system, and there will be no special advantages over towed guns, but it will cost more. Tracked platform preferred.
      Yes, an interesting machine, and I think that our aircraft need self-propelled guns both on a crawler and a car chassis, you just need to calculate their number and ratio. The only thing that is not entirely clear:
      - the shape of the tower, in its front part, since the module is not inhabited, then you can make it more streamlined, which will slightly reduce its dimensions and, accordingly, weight.
      - a machine gun mount above the tower hatch, it will have a very large dead zone, wouldn’t it be better to execute it in the form of the one that stands on the T90MS
      1. Lopatov
        Lopatov 20 May 2013 10: 06 New
        0
        Quote: svp67
        the shape of the tower, in its front part, since the module is not inhabited, you can make it more streamlined, which will slightly reduce its dimensions and, accordingly, weight.

        There should be levers of coordinators of the loading mechanism. And the armor is still anti-fragmentation, especially the weight will not decrease
    2. Lopatov
      Lopatov 20 May 2013 10: 03 New
      0
      Quote: avt
      and there are no special advantages over towed guns

      A huge advantage. Time occupation and leaving fire, like a full-fledged self-propelled guns. Plus automatic loader. On towed do only rammers, shell and charging. The rest is handles. Therefore, only a very well trained and physically strong calculation can provide a high rate of fire.
      1. avt
        avt 20 May 2013 17: 50 New
        +2
        Quote: Spade
        Plus automatic loader.

        That is yes.
        Quote: Spade
        Time occupation and leaving fire, like a full-fledged self-propelled guns.

        request And here I doubt it. Compared with the tracked platform, it will obviously be more difficult to reach and approximately towed. Of course, you need to think carefully and see, especially since there’s some experience. There are 130 mm station wagons on wheels, but there’s a different chassis if MAZ's memory does not change. But at first glance - a flimsy design, some kind of European, it seems that the sketch was sketched during the time of the "triumph" of wheeled movement from the time of Serdyukov.
        1. Lopatov
          Lopatov 20 May 2013 18: 06 New
          +1
          Quote: avt
          And here I doubt it. Compared to the tracked platform, it will obviously be more difficult to reach and approximately towed

          Yes no, much faster than towed. Especially from the march.

          Quote: avt
          But at first glance - a flimsy design, some kind of European, it seems like a sketch was sketched during the time of the "triumph" of wheeled movement of the times of Serdyukov.

          The chassis is not a particular problem. In general, this is not “Serdyukovskoe”, “Mstu” they wanted to put on wheels even under the USSR. But money, money ...
          1. avt
            avt 20 May 2013 19: 26 New
            +1
            Quote: Spade
            In general, this is not “Serdyukovskoe”, “Mstu” they wanted to put on wheels even under the USSR. But money, money ...

            Well, under the USSR there was more of an argument than money, I suppose all the same, as in the case of the BMP-1 - the issue of cross-country ability was the main one. Although they could easily figure out and decide that having a tracked chassis, wheeled and towed is not cost-effective, they cost the first and third options.
            1. Lopatov
              Lopatov 20 May 2013 19: 31 New
              0
              Money. Almost all self-propelled old. First of all, they were changed to 2C19. Therefore, we decided to get along with cheap 2A65 where Msta-K was planned
        2. smirnov
          smirnov 20 May 2013 22: 12 New
          +2
          “Coalition-SV-KSH” is really somewhat reminiscent of “Shore”, but there the smaller caliber (130mm) and, by the way, the Mazovian chassis are also recognized as flimsy. But coastal artillery and tasks are slightly different, but here I think common sense will prevail.
  7. AlNikolaich
    AlNikolaich 20 May 2013 09: 54 New
    +1
    Strange ... An analogue of Czech Dana, but on a KAMAZ chassis. Not impressive! Kamaz-machine poorly suited for work in combat units. First of all, because of the weak and unreliable design!
    Another thing is the Urals! But apparently the concept of wheeled self-propelled guns is not relevant for our army ...
    1. Lopatov
      Lopatov 20 May 2013 10: 08 New
      +2
      Then the Bryansk "Voshchina"
      1. Usher
        Usher 14 September 2017 12: 28 New
        0
        Cheza "Wax" I hear for the first time.
    2. realist
      realist 13 January 2018 14: 11 New
      0
      the position of lobbyists is relevant in our time, it turns out that Kamaz is stronger than the Urals ...
  8. Kpox
    Kpox 20 May 2013 10: 01 New
    0
    Quote: Canep
    The outriggers are not located correctly; to ensure circular shelling, the supports should be equally spaced. turret turning center. And on the model, they are strongly biased forward.


    the supports, in my opinion, are better located in the center of mass, so even at an equal distance from the center of the tower is not a solution - you would need a couple more supports under the "mass" of the cab and engine of the car.
  9. the47th
    the47th 20 May 2013 10: 08 New
    +2
    It was necessary to arrange the guns horizontally and name the self-propelled guns not "Coalition-SV", but "Mammoth".
    1. smirnov
      smirnov 20 May 2013 22: 14 New
      0
      So close to the fighting bears)))
  10. runway
    runway 20 May 2013 10: 11 New
    +3
    "Instead of RDX in the cannon a much higher density substance was used. It exploded using plasma initiation - a special discharge. Due to the high density, the detonation speed is also higher than conventional explosives, and due to the use of plasma, in addition to kinetic energy, an electromagnetic pulse acts on the projectile, ”said a defense industrial complex employee.
    If you use such a "source" as this employee of the defense industry complex, who does not see the difference between a gun and a howitzer, then you can dream up anything smile
  11. olegff68
    olegff68 20 May 2013 10: 21 New
    +3
    Flurry of Fire mode?!? This means modular propelling charges, digital UO and AZ systems like the PzH 2000 !!! At the same time twin artillery installation !!! It turns out well, a very heavy machine gun !!! good
    1. Lopatov
      Lopatov 20 May 2013 10: 25 New
      0
      Without modular, calculation cannot be removed from the tower. Well, paired, the devil knows, I heard, they refused two trunks.
  12. Iraclius
    Iraclius 20 May 2013 11: 08 New
    +1
    Some nonsense is written about the effect of an electromagnetic pulse on a projectile. The author clearly confuses traditional artillery with railguns. This time. The second - and what does not suit modern self-propelled artillery? The eight-axle KamAZ is good for everyone, but its cross-country ability can never be compared to tracked chassis - in my opinion, a banal and unnecessary copy of the Dana concept or the South African G6.
    About the articulated design is already more interesting. About an uninhabited tower - how reliable the structure will turn out and whether it will turn out so that after the first volley the automation will stiffen.
    In short, there are more questions than answers.
    1. krot00f
      krot00f 20 May 2013 14: 41 New
      +1
      And the whole ship’s Artillery (ALA AK-100, AK-175,) doesn’t shoot at us either — it’s “stubborn.”)) Automation generally rarely works the first time, and when they bring to mind no questions, everything from the developer's office depends.
    2. realist
      realist 13 January 2018 14: 13 New
      0
      eight-wheeled, four-axle — you mean a colleague!
  13. Svyatoslav72
    Svyatoslav72 20 May 2013 13: 22 New
    -1
    Here we must immediately think of the military and not as a fetish collector. AND! therefore, as a "vertical" to the ship - this is good and right. As a coastal security gun on the Escander mobile platform, the MZKT 7930 is also a successful application. Like an army self-propelled guns based on a tank (or wheeled chassis) in the vertical version - NO.
    People! look at the dimensions, what kind of a shed with rails, how will it chat and what is its stability? In the conditions of modern warfare, it is impossible to create greater visibility or poor stability with dubious cross-country ability, it threatens with quick detection and destruction. You should not invest the loot in the obvious narrow profile and tactical inferiority, it is not effective and just stupid.
    1. Lopatov
      Lopatov 20 May 2013 14: 17 New
      0
      Quote: Svyatoslav72
      look at the size of the shed with rails

      2S19 is also a rather big device, although I agree with you, two trunks is redundant.
  14. krot00f
    krot00f 20 May 2013 14: 29 New
    +3
    I read the article, Well, the impressions are ambiguous, it seems like there is a hint of understanding, you can’t confuse people and remove the heresy from the article, it’s sadly done. The double-barreled shot at the same time never planned. Later, one barrel was completely abandoned from it. The “flurry" of fire is not obtained at all because of the rate of fire of the gun, although a certain target is certainly needed. This is a feature of shooting when several shells approach one target at once, it is provided by the difference in the trajectories, then the science fiction methods are applied.))) - Modular loading. Why is a flurry of fire generally needed? Now if the accuracy is low, the fragmentation of ammunition is low, the fuse of the Second World War, then of course you need a hail of shells. In other cases, the point target is struck by guided ammunition, as experience with the use of artillery is no longer possible. There was news Msta works well with Krasnopol, well, manual loading there is further what, the rate of fire is not needed. Further, a range of 70 km. Well, shoot at such a range with uncontrollable ammunition, scatter like 4 football fields, you need a flurry of fire, of course it is necessary. !! Only tsifirki mixed up logs 40km. maximum, and in order to get into someone's adjustable ammunition with Ushami, but this again, science fiction is of course only for Russia. All sorts of Rhine metals, with Jews and Americans, have long developed this science fiction, and we are disused. Well, in the end, the self-propelled guns are not a tank, what a signature, a machine gun booking and other heresies until they become like magazines. Do you want a real lack of Msta - the lack of mortar fire is closer than 6,5 km, it does not shoot, that is, it shoots with zero efficiency, direct fire like a tank. Yes, and KAMAZ wants money, a wheeled chassis for self-propelled guns, you know, let the muzhiks in Europe shoot from such.
    1. Lopatov
      Lopatov 20 May 2013 14: 54 New
      0
      Quote: krot00f
      Do you want a real lack of Msta - the lack of mortar fire is closer than 6,5 km, it does not shoot, that is, it shoots with zero efficiency, direct fire like a tank.

      So mortar, or direct fire?

      In general, do you propose to switch to muzzle-loading cast iron, the rest is fantastic?
      1. krot00f
        krot00f 20 May 2013 17: 08 New
        +1
        Do not shoot along the hinged path, shoot direct fire, So it’s more understandable. The fact is that journalists distort facts, Yes there is a promising self-propelled guns, And everything else about it is fiction of a sick imagination, But if photos already appeared then this is not a promising self-propelled guns, but a dead-end project. And with foreign developments it’s even more interesting, there is a disinformation there, And sometimes they write the truth, only no one believes that it works.
        1. Lopatov
          Lopatov 20 May 2013 17: 17 New
          0
          Quote: krot00f
          Do not shoot along the hinged path, shoot direct fire,

          Are you sure you know what mortar shooting is?
          1. krot00f
            krot00f 20 May 2013 17: 26 New
            +1
            Mortar shooting I think shooting along a steep hinged trajectory, like a mortar, of course the slang expression agrees.
            1. Lopatov
              Lopatov 20 May 2013 17: 46 New
              0
              Not really slang. This is a very accurate definition. Meaning shooting with an elevation angle of more than 45 degrees. Well, none of the 2C19 forbids shooting at the mounted. At any range
              1. krot00f
                krot00f 20 May 2013 17: 56 New
                +1
                Ha ha, of course.)) It does not prohibit, the minimum charge determines the minimum firing range. So it was removed because the 800 G fuse was NOT cocked by the RGM-6 if you are not in the know. How many charges are there?
                1. Lopatov
                  Lopatov 20 May 2013 18: 23 New
                  0
                  Quote: krot00f
                  NOT cocked RGM-6

                  And therefore it has long been changed to the B-429?
                  1. krot00f
                    krot00f 20 May 2013 18: 40 New
                    +1
                    B-429 for a cannon shot, he has nothing to do with a howitzer, Still write the difference between RGM-6 and B-429. Then here is Riddle 3 for you, one of them is tank. Where did you put the taganchik, and why is it not needed, and which of the V-429E RGMs?
                    1. Lopatov
                      Lopatov 20 May 2013 18: 52 New
                      +1
                      Quote: krot00f
                      B-429 for a cannon shot, he has nothing to do with a howitzer

                      Purely for the cannon B-429E. Which, unlike the B-429, does not have a centrifugal fuse. That's when you figure out how the B-429 and B-429E are different and why one is for a smooth barrel and the other is for a rifled barrel, then you will make riddles.

                      On 2S19 and 2A65 of the percussion used RGM-2, RGM-2M and B-429 Last-on a long-range shot. With a long plastic sleeve, on 2S19, even the trailer has such a "Long sleeve"

                      And no RGM-6. "Which do not work."
                      1. krot00f
                        krot00f 20 May 2013 19: 06 New
                        +1
                        Here you gave yourself away, there are no centrifugal stoppers in any of them. I strongly doubt that you know what “Search” is and you have not heard about the topic “Key”. In-429E for smooth-bore guns, tank, a tagan was shoved there so that it would not work on the trajectory when opening the plumage. And yes you're right with a long-range shot Any of the RGM and B-429 is working. Production of the same department, I suppose)
                      2. Lopatov
                        Lopatov 20 May 2013 19: 16 New
                        0
                        Of course not, the B-429E.

                        Quote: krot00f
                        I strongly doubt that you know what "Search" is and have not heard about the topic "Key".

                        I have no idea

                        Quote: krot00f
                        B-429E for smoothbore guns, tank

                        And for the MT-12. And so here I know him. True, even in the first year of the military school.
                      3. krot00f
                        krot00f 20 May 2013 19: 30 New
                        +2
                        Well, how are you? Research Institute "Search" is the dad of all Russian fuses,) In particular, the RGM line. The theme "Key" gave birth to confusion. You need to know history. Unfortunately, the creators of the B-429 are no longer with us; there is no one to pull back.
                      4. Lopatov
                        Lopatov 20 May 2013 19: 35 New
                        +1
                        Our fuses were hardly studied. 2 semester, credit without rating. So I don’t know much about them.
            2. krot00f
              krot00f 20 May 2013 18: 52 New
              0
              Although I may not know that it was replaced, I know why, the overload at which the V-429 is cocked is greater than that of the RGM-6 Which only confirms my words, About the removed minimum charge.
              1. Lopatov
                Lopatov 20 May 2013 19: 05 New
                0
                In short, someone misled you about such restrictions
                By the way, as with Krasnopol, this old one had to be charged in 2C19 using special belts and dances with a tambourine. Krasnopol-2 is much shorter.
                1. krot00f
                  krot00f 20 May 2013 19: 17 New
                  0
                  Krasnopol did not hold in his hands, Watched a movie There, the whole process of shooting a dance with a tambourine. I read about Krasnopol-2, it seems to shoot further. KBPShniki is a strong team, we will wait until we get to 40 km,)
                2. Lopatov
                  Lopatov 20 May 2013 19: 28 New
                  0
                  I generally support the development of ordinary ones.
                  Accuracy. At least at the level of requirements for complete training. The same Chinese have weather radars in each MLRS battery and in each division of the receiver. And we have happiness if DMK is a worker. And so on almost all counts.
                3. krot00f
                  krot00f 20 May 2013 23: 13 New
                  +1
                  I completely agree with you, Uncontrolled ammunition is cheaper and needs to be improved, the correction system must be made at least in range, Air gap for a long distance in the form of a non-contact fuse and for a short distance in the form of a remote, Concrete-piercing with high-precision deceleration, auto-adjustable deceleration. The fragmentation should be increased by reducing the fuse response time. Now, after all, the revolution in explosive technology mechanical fuses are replaced by electronic counterparts. A howitzer is just a song there, all systems are needed for any overload, and the widest range of ammunition.
                4. Lopatov
                  Lopatov 20 May 2013 23: 43 New
                  0
                  Here, in principle, it is necessary to divide.
                  For small and medium in the interests of the battalion brigade: conventional without correction with new electronic fuses. Because if you need a short response time and high rate of fire, the installer with the keys will not provide it. Even on ordinary drums, there is no time to switch cranes and screw caps. Only remote input, for example, induction.
                  For individual goals, managed or adjusted. Otherwise, it’s even a little expensive

                  For large ones, like for bourgeoisie: inertial with satellite correction plus an additional option for the final semi-active in reflected or passive infrared. But here reconnaissance and strike systems should work.
                5. krot00f
                  krot00f 21 May 2013 11: 20 New
                  0
                  So write the induction input well, You know why the keys will never be removed from the fuses, The thing is that the time between the induction input and the shot is very limited, in addition, the autonomy of the fuse cannot be neglected, the electronic analogue of the RGM with the key is required. It is dangerous to twist the cap in general, With a key on O, it will work on the trajectory in the rain, it is not even all-weather.
                6. krot00f
                  krot00f 21 May 2013 12: 14 New
                  0
                  Here I’ve dug open, about it, obviously a schoolboy
  • Evgeny_Lev
    Evgeny_Lev 20 May 2013 15: 45 New
    +1
    Like a BE "flurry of fire" is when you firing all the necessary number of ammunition, you get out of position. Secrecy is ensured by the fact that all shells simultaneously arrive, even those fired first. When together they cover the target, the battery calculations are already in a different position.
    1. realist
      realist 13 January 2018 14: 22 New
      0
      40 km shell will fly at a speed of 600 meters per second for about 67 seconds, this is the first! in 2 minutes 30 shots, plus the time to switch to the stowed position, totaling more than 2 minutes. And you also need to move to another position, by what means the enemy will detect the firing point and decide how to suppress it (at a distance of 40 km) for how long in reserve with the crew of self-propelled guns?
  • xomaNN
    xomaNN 20 May 2013 15: 13 New
    +1
    I, as a pet of the military-industrial complex of the Union, are pleased with the awareness that such systems are developed in general. Even if she does not go into the series, experience and experience will come in handy.
  • Evgeny_Lev
    Evgeny_Lev 20 May 2013 15: 33 New
    0
    Here you are, Finns.
    1. gremlin1977
      gremlin1977 22 May 2013 21: 20 New
      +1
      and what does the anti-aircraft bofors
  • Ilyukha
    Ilyukha 20 May 2013 15: 42 New
    +2
    Perhaps the “Coalition” is a kind of exhibition show car, not a weapon system. They decided to hit it not with a target on the battlefield, but with the minds of potential customers abroad (mainly dark-skinned customers)). Well, as many as two trunks!
    What do they give? Rate of Fire? Yes! Is the tip-off failure twice as strong? Yes!
    Improving accuracy, hmm .. What accuracy when firing at 70 km, when the aiming is two times stronger than that of a single-barrel system? You yourself know what happens.
    The Msta-S howitzer manufactured by our Uraltransmash has one serious drawback in comparison with the latest foreign counterparts — the projectile is automatically fed into the barrel, and the charge is manually charged. Strange, somehow it turns out.
    1. Hort
      Hort 20 May 2013 16: 27 New
      +1
      Well, the interruption of the pickup, most likely it is supposed to compensate for the fast "computer-satellite" guidance. As for accuracy: if it shoots with conventional shells, then of course there will not be much sniper accuracy, but if the ammunition will include (more precisely, even without the if) laser-guided projectiles, then ...
      1. ankh-andrej
        ankh-andrej 20 May 2013 22: 20 New
        +1
        Laser-guided projectiles have restrictions on overload when firing, which entails a range limitation.
    2. krot00f
      krot00f 20 May 2013 17: 24 New
      +1
      Nothing strange. How will you choose a charge? Now they came up with the labeling of the cells when loading, And then this is from the shipable AU. But during the development of the MSTA, this was not.
      1. Lopatov
        Lopatov 20 May 2013 17: 49 New
        +1
        For this, modules exist. It’s just faster to do with them. In principle, from the same 2C19 you can also pick up. True, the charger will not be able to so quickly add. pull charges out of cartridges.
        Something you are confused about here.
  • bunta
    bunta 20 May 2013 15: 57 New
    +2
    Quote: Ilyukha
    Pickup Failure


    Quite right, even with a fully automated charge, the time between two shots is necessary not only to reload but also to make corrections and allow the system to calm mechanical vibrations. At this time, a shot from the second barrel cannot be fired. Then why is it needed? request
  • Hort
    Hort 20 May 2013 16: 24 New
    +1
    the version with articulation has a minus: if you plant one, then pull out only the “Hero”.
    By the way, they walk exclusively in pairs in the tundra and marshland for this very reason
  • Thomas A. Anderson
    20 May 2013 16: 46 New
    +2
    I didn’t take information from Izvestia) Sources of information:
    http://www.arms-expo.ru,
    http://pro-tank.ru,
    http://www.i-mash.ru
    Basically www.arms-expo.ru, there and 70 km range stated)
    It will be excellent on the Almaty platform, but KAMAZ looks awful)
    1. Lopatov
      Lopatov 20 May 2013 17: 30 New
      +1
      Quote: Thomas A. Anderson
      It will be excellent on the Almaty platform, but KAMAZ looks awful)

      You never know how it looks. It has an advantage over towed and yet cheaper.
      In general, there are persistent rumors that still the trunk will be one in all versions.
  • postman
    postman 20 May 2013 17: 35 New
    +3
    Quote: Thomas A. Anderson
    I didn’t take information from Izvestia)

    "legs" grow from Izvestia
    http://izvestia.ru/news/549766

    Strange but at http://isee.org/
    not a word about this miracle
    ========================
    One of the directions for the development of explosives is the widespread use of granular explosives suitable for mechanized loading of granular explosives, and the explosion of charges without the use of initiating explosives (for example, using a powerful electric discharge), the development and implementation of new types of explosives [for example, compounds containing the oxygen-rich trinitromethyl group C (NO2) 3], the use of nitroparaffins, liquid oxidizer-based explosive mixtures (tetranitromethane, nitrogen tetroxide, etc.).
  • bddrus
    bddrus 20 May 2013 18: 11 New
    0
    there is no answer to the main question - will there be two trunks or not?
    And the fleet started talking about some kind of Cartun project, not Coalition-F (or how was it planned for the fleet?) And the layouts that Rogozin showed were all single-barrel
    1. krot00f
      krot00f 21 May 2013 13: 18 New
      0
      Everything is clear here, the double-barreled shot did not go. In the fleet, Cartown, its Arsenal does, It has nothing to do with the coalition, It’s just that someone put a comma in the wrong place, you can’t execute it. AK-130 will redo everything.
  • Tan4ik
    Tan4ik 20 May 2013 18: 54 New
    +1
    An interesting system. But I can’t understand one thing, how it will be in practice in a real battle. Although the engineers will think it over, but still.
  • uzer 13
    uzer 13 20 May 2013 20: 15 New
    -1
    The opinion of a layman is this: front-line self-propelled guns should be done on a caterpillar chassis and with maximum automation of the process and a high rate of fire. But installations based on heavy vehicles also have positive qualities: they can be moved faster to the right place, they can be significantly cheaper (because they don’t need a special rate of fire and mechanisms can be made simpler.) Having such a firing range, these vehicles may have lightweight armor or not at all, since there is no need to put them directly into the combat area. In general, more artillery is good and different!
  • Trevis
    Trevis 20 May 2013 20: 40 New
    +1
    Mass production of such self-propelled guns is not worth it, because there are more important projects.
    1. Lopatov
      Lopatov 20 May 2013 20: 45 New
      +4
      Yeah. Aircraft carriers. Twenty pieces to build, and then it will be possible to change 2C3 in the troops.
      Although they are unlikely to survive. But we have a lot of ZiS-3 and D-44. You can do with them.
    2. krot00f
      krot00f 20 May 2013 23: 17 New
      0
      The concept remained en masse in the Soviet Union, and self-propelled guns should be ready for production.
  • Trevis
    Trevis 20 May 2013 20: 58 New
    +1
    Yeah. Aircraft carriers. Twenty pieces to build

    One aircraft carrier "Admiral Kuznetsov" laugh (
  • crambol
    crambol 20 May 2013 21: 09 New
    +1
    But the Ministry of Defense from the very beginning has been trying to ignore this artillery system, in 2010 declaring no funding, and that this is allegedly not a priority.


    They say that the MoD is financing soft chairs on wheels and karaoke toilets!
  • ankh-andrej
    ankh-andrej 20 May 2013 22: 08 New
    +3
    An experimental thermoelectrochemical artillery installation was tested in Russia.
    Instead of RDX, a much higher density substance was used in the gun. It exploded using plasma initiation - a special discharge. Due to the high density, the detonation speed is also higher than conventional explosives, and due to the use of plasma, in addition to kinetic energy, the projectile is affected by an electromagnetic pulse. An experimental gun mount was developed on the basis of the reinforced 152-mm 2C35 Coalition-SV double-barreled self-propelled artillery mount. According to open sources, today there is only one prototype of the “Coalition”. The declared range of the guns is 70 kilometers.
    Read more: http://www.arms-expo.ru/049051124051049054048055.html
  • bunta
    bunta 20 May 2013 22: 10 New
    +4
    Here are some fresh top secret photos. For those who still do not understand.
  • bunta
    bunta 20 May 2013 22: 10 New
    +4
    Well, this is generally ...
    1. Argon
      Argon 20 May 2013 23: 43 New
      0
      Cool young man, if I could, I would put as many pluses as trunks. And humor in the subject, Super! laughing
  • Anton Karpenko
    Anton Karpenko 20 May 2013 22: 47 New
    0
    I wonder what her real rate of fire is?
  • bublic82009
    bublic82009 20 May 2013 23: 11 New
    0
    Well, the Swedes came up with a double-barreled mortar. now we need such a howitzer. the question is whether she need this? there are RZSO guided missiles. It’s not always effective to simply shoot from the trunks in squares.
  • Strashila
    Strashila 21 May 2013 09: 37 New
    0
    If you perform such a machine in a modular way ... then you can install it on any type of vessel in the shortest possible time and provide art support for landing, given the response time and the possibility of using guided ammunition ... just becomes irreplaceable.
  • carbofo
    carbofo 21 May 2013 17: 05 New
    +1
    I liked the idea of ​​an articulated machine, it’s necessary to run this option, at least the combat capabilities and autonomy increase.
    As an option, see how the MTO placement in the trailer will behave.
    We have the same seems to be a good chassis on this topic, it seems the Bison is called.
    In general, it’s time for a long time to do semi-automated systems, if not in series, then at least work out for experience.
    And by the way, if you refine the system, you can also switch to 130 naval caliber with unitary ammunition, although as far as I understand there will be problems with the weight of the shot and loading due to the small dimensions of the chassis.
  • gremlin1977
    gremlin1977 22 May 2013 21: 35 New
    0
    the king is the gun that didn’t shoot, the king the bell that didn’t ring. But it’s not time to stop developing unnecessary substances. And by the way, Msta-S is not so much a howitzer, but rather an anti-tank installation.
    1. Yorgven
      Yorgven 23 May 2013 03: 04 New
      +1
      Comrade outplayed in Gigi? Where is Msta-S PT?
    2. krot00f
      krot00f 28 May 2013 14: 50 New
      0
      Ha ha Msta from PT is far as well as Tank from Airplane.
  • z903
    z903 9 December 2013 18: 42 New
    0
    2 barrels overheat less when firing - probably this was meant by developers? You can do 6 more barrels with a drum) And 70 km shoot rockets from a cannon)
  • papont64
    papont64 April 29 2014 04: 28 New
    0
    Quite enough two horns !!!)))
  • SOLGA
    SOLGA 23 May 2014 22: 35 New
    0
    on the basis of KAMAZ would also be found application (faster movement, less eating)
  • Dream_w
    Dream_w 6 March 2015 09: 58 New
    0
    Quote: BARKAS
    capabilities

    Are you sure that this is lobbying, and not a well-calculated calculation for the developed infrastructure of KAMAZ ?! I’m not special and I don’t have statistics at hand, but KAMAZs are like dirt and app. parts for them and services and specialists and operating experience, etc.
    Correct if I am mistaken.
  • Shtroffrus
    Shtroffrus 31 October 2017 13: 04 New
    +1
    Near my house there is a dirt road through the field. So on it in the fall KrAZ-boltnik sat down. Onboard. I can’t imagine the Coalition-SV-KSh in our road-off-road climatic conditions