Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    2S35 Koalitsiya-SV 152mm

    Share
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16535
    Points : 17143
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Any news on the chassis use for Koalition?

    Post  GarryB on Fri Oct 03, 2014 10:06 am

    Indeed Trucks move much faster on modern roads and are cheaper to operate and simpler to maintain than tracked vehicles.

    I suspect the turret is a modular system that can be dropped into any suitable vehicle chassis or trailer.

    the Naval version will have under deck ammo handling and likely two barrels, but otherwise should be similar.


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order
    avatar
    George1

    Posts : 10529
    Points : 11006
    Join date : 2011-12-22
    Location : Greece

    Re: 2S35 Koalitsiya-SV 152mm

    Post  George1 on Mon Nov 17, 2014 9:45 am


    chicken

    Posts : 99
    Points : 104
    Join date : 2014-09-04

    Re: 2S35 Koalitsiya-SV 152mm

    Post  chicken on Mon Nov 17, 2014 12:17 pm



    The thing that probably stands out for me is the back portion of the hull.

    Asf

    Posts : 476
    Points : 495
    Join date : 2014-03-27

    Re: 2S35 Koalitsiya-SV 152mm

    Post  Asf on Mon Nov 17, 2014 1:42 pm

    George1 wrote:
    It's rather old photo.

    There will be no twin-barrel 'Koalitsia'
    avatar
    magnumcromagnon

    Posts : 4488
    Points : 4661
    Join date : 2013-12-05
    Location : Pindos ave., Pindosville, Pindosylvania, Pindostan

    Re: 2S35 Koalitsiya-SV 152mm

    Post  magnumcromagnon on Mon Nov 17, 2014 2:32 pm

    Asf wrote:
    George1 wrote:
    It's rather old photo.

    There will be no twin-barrel 'Koalitsia'

    That's not accurate, the Koalition SPG is a joint project between the Russian Army and Navy. To say their won't be a twin barrel version is not actually true because a twin-barrel version will exist for the Ru Navy, it's actually more accurate to say their won't be a twin-barrel ground forces version.
    avatar
    Werewolf

    Posts : 5357
    Points : 5588
    Join date : 2012-10-24

    Re: 2S35 Koalitsiya-SV 152mm

    Post  Werewolf on Mon Nov 17, 2014 4:39 pm

    To bad i hoped for ground forces Coalizia with two barrels and with the nickname Mammoth Tank.
    avatar
    magnumcromagnon

    Posts : 4488
    Points : 4661
    Join date : 2013-12-05
    Location : Pindos ave., Pindosville, Pindosylvania, Pindostan

    Re: 2S35 Koalitsiya-SV 152mm

    Post  magnumcromagnon on Mon Nov 17, 2014 6:23 pm

    Werewolf wrote:To bad i hoped for ground forces Coalizia with two barrels and with the nickname Mammoth Tank.

    They're won't be a ground forces version of the twin-barrel Koalition, at least initially...according to what the so-called 'reports' (only time will tell how credible they are)  have said, but assuming the 'reports' are true, it's not entirely impossible that the first versions that will be delivered will be 'one' barreled, but later versions that are delivered post-2020 that are twin-barreled could be delivered if the Ru-Army finds the extra weight and complexity being out-weighed by it's usefulness. If a single barrel version is capable of landing 6-10 shells on simultaneous impact, with GLONASS-kits and with additional laser correction being emitted by UAV's, than twin-barrel versions may very well be able to do the same with 12-20 shells. If the twin-barrel Koaltion proves that it can guide 20 shells on simultaneous impact, than it can prove than it could diminish the need (by a reasonable extent) for the use of additional bunker buster bombs, because in all-likeliness firing 20 shells at a target will probably be cheaper than having a Su-34 doing the same job with 1 or 2 bunker-buster bombs. Additional glide-kits created for Koalition shells may extend the range beyond 70 km, and in to the 80, 90, or perhaps the 100 km range.

    Asf

    Posts : 476
    Points : 495
    Join date : 2014-03-27

    Re: 2S35 Koalitsiya-SV 152mm

    Post  Asf on Mon Nov 17, 2014 10:05 pm

    magnumcromagnon wrote:
    They're won't be a ground forces version of the twin-barrel Koalition, at least initially...according to what the so-called 'reports' (only time will tell how credible they are)  have said, but assuming the 'reports' are true, it's not entirely impossible that the first versions that will be delivered will be 'one' barreled, but later versions that are delivered post-2020 that are twin-barreled could be delivered if the Ru-Army finds the extra weight and complexity being out-weighed by it's usefulness. If a single barrel version is capable of landing 6-10 shells on simultaneous impact, with GLONASS-kits and with additional laser correction being emitted by UAV's, than twin-barrel versions may very well be able to do the same with 12-20 shells. If the twin-barrel Koaltion proves that it can guide 20 shells on simultaneous impact, than it can prove than it could diminish the need (by a reasonable extent) for the use of additional bunker buster bombs, because in all-likeliness firing 20 shells at a target will probably be cheaper than having a Su-34 doing the same job with 1 or 2 bunker-buster bombs. Additional glide-kits created for Koalition shells may extend the range beyond 70 km, and in to the 80, 90, or perhaps the 100 km range.
    Then I see no point in buying single-barrel version at all. Why not to produce twin-barrel version from the beginning?
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16535
    Points : 17143
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: 2S35 Koalitsiya-SV 152mm

    Post  GarryB on Tue Nov 18, 2014 10:11 am

    Twin barrel version with twin belt autoloader was too big to fit in transport aircraft and in 2020 will likely still be too big.

    Size does not matter for the naval version of course because even the smallest destroyer wont fit in a transport aircraft...

    Having 6-8 shells land on target at one time means a battery of 8 vehicles can deliver 8 x 8 = 64 shells all at once to the target, which is 2.7 tons of steel and HE landing as one on the target... I think the target wont even feel a thing.


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order

    Vann7

    Posts : 3471
    Points : 3583
    Join date : 2012-05-16

    Re: 2S35 Koalitsiya-SV 152mm

    Post  Vann7 on Tue Nov 18, 2014 4:32 pm



    It will be nice if the two barrel version could each one be configured to hit not in the same place..
    with about ~20 meter distance if they desire , that will significantly allow the artillery to cover wider area about twice of it in about same time. But if both barrels hit nearly the same place it will be wasted ammo.. in the case it hits nothing or that is over kill for the target is seeking to destroy. A modern tank can be disabled with just one hit.
    avatar
    magnumcromagnon

    Posts : 4488
    Points : 4661
    Join date : 2013-12-05
    Location : Pindos ave., Pindosville, Pindosylvania, Pindostan

    Re: 2S35 Koalitsiya-SV 152mm

    Post  magnumcromagnon on Tue Nov 18, 2014 6:57 pm

    Vann7 wrote:

    It will be nice if the two barrel version could each one be configured to hit not in the same place..
    with about ~20 meter distance if they desire  , that will significantly allow the artillery to cover wider area about twice of it in about same time. But if both barrels hit nearly the same place it will be  wasted ammo.. in the case it hits nothing or that is over kill for the target is seeking to destroy.  A modern tank can be disabled with just one hit.

    Why would it be a waste of ammo? Hardened bunkers are designed to withstand a hellish onslaught of damage, on the high end some bunkers (such as strategically hardened bunkers carrying ICBM's such as the SS-18) are designed to withstand 6000 PSi with ease, if the twi-barrel Koalition is capable of 20 shell simultaneous impact than a group of 10 twin-barreled Koalitons carrying 60 rounds each with a newer generation of bunker-piercing shells with GLONASS and glide-kits (with additional UAV laser correction), could make a mockery of tactical bunkers created by a fairly advanced insurgency (lets say it's sponsored by Ukraine or Georgia) that are hardened to 60 PSI. Plus the need and the worry for Koalition to guide shells 20 meters away is rather meaningless considering with GLONASS-kits, glide-kits, UAV laser correction could easily do that and not to mention a new generation HE-Frag munitions could (if not now already) make 20 meters well within it's 'lethal' radius against personnel, and the worry is baseless any way considering they'll be 'multiple' Koalitions in a unit capable of firing on different targets.
    avatar
    magnumcromagnon

    Posts : 4488
    Points : 4661
    Join date : 2013-12-05
    Location : Pindos ave., Pindosville, Pindosylvania, Pindostan

    Re: 2S35 Koalitsiya-SV 152mm

    Post  magnumcromagnon on Tue Nov 18, 2014 7:21 pm

    GarryB wrote: Having 6-8 shells land on target at one time means a battery of 8 vehicles can deliver 8 x 8 = 64 shells all at once to the target, which is 2.7 tons of steel and HE landing as one on the target... I think the target wont even feel a thing.

    Garry what makes you think a single-barrel Koalition would be only to able squeeze a measly 6 (or 8 for that matter) shells for simultaneous impact? I know I mentioned 6 shells in a earlier post (I apologize that I misspoke), but let's think about this now, the Pzh 2000 is capable of 5 shell simultaneous impact with the unreliable human element loading the powder charges separately, and the Pzh 2000 had it's design roots from the mid-1980's, and it's finalized design ready by the the mid-1990's using older and less-efficient computers. Russia is a country with hands-down the most experience creating auto-loaders, so creating a fully automated loading system (eliminating the unreliable human element) for the single-barrel Koaliton, as well as newer, more powerful and efficient digital computers should 'easily' land 10 shells per target. For it's limit to be only 6 shells would be a big let-down if not a clear sign of under-achievement, and if there is a human operator loading powder charges separately, than it would defeat the purpose of the Armata chassis ( created to have a separate armored capsule designed to keep human operators away from highly-combustible ammo). A human operator loading powder charges separately would leave them outside the armored capsule (and the vehicle for that matter) and within close proximity of the thinly armored ammo storage area.
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16535
    Points : 17143
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: 2S35 Koalitsiya-SV 152mm

    Post  GarryB on Wed Nov 19, 2014 4:20 am

    It will be nice if the two barrel version could each one be configured to hit not in the same place..

    The shells are guided... and there is no reason to even fire both barrels if the target doesn't require it.

    The two guns are there to increase the rate of fire, not to get two shells on target.


    with about ~20 meter distance if they desire , that will significantly allow the artillery to cover wider area about twice of it in about same time.

    If you want area coverage then use Smerch. The Koalition is for area targets and point targets. For area targets non guided shells could be used.

    But if both barrels hit nearly the same place it will be wasted ammo.. in the case it hits nothing or that is over kill for the target is seeking to destroy.

    Two shells hitting a building or bunker or wall will not be twice as effective but will be an improvement with regard to effect.

    A modern tank can be disabled with just one hit.

    probably true but two guided shells coming in at nearly the same time might improve the chances of penetrating APS system defences for example.

    If the target is a line of trenches then delayed fuses with the shells burying themselves in the ground near the trench before exploding would be devastating to the trench line... two shells even more so.

    Garry what makes you think a single-barrel Koalition would be only to able squeeze a measly 6 (or 8 for that matter) shells for simultaneous impact?

    Not many targets would justify more shells. An enemy unit caught in the open, 8 shells all using GLONASS guidance to space their detonation points with airbursts at say... 3 metres above the ground and a very large area becomes a killing ground.

    Just looking at video footage from Afghanistan with the British forces there and it is all open and exposed with very few places to hide or dig in... even just 4 x 40kg HE Frag shells would be devastating.

    A human operator loading powder charges separately would leave them outside the armored capsule (and the vehicle for that matter) and within close proximity of the thinly armored ammo storage area.

    There are no human charge loaders. The mechanism is fully automatic with a belt feed from each side loading shells and propellent charges.

    I agree, based on your premises that a higher rate of fire would be likely, but then an F-16 can carry a max payload of 7 tons. It is a question of need.

    I very much doubt a battery of Koalition vehicles would need to fire 20 rounds... the vast majority of the time it will be a few rounds to hit a few specific targets.

    Obviously when the targets location is not know exactly a salvo of dumb unguided shells might make a 20 round volley useful, but in such circumstances I think rocket artillery would be more effective.


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order
    avatar
    George1

    Posts : 10529
    Points : 11006
    Join date : 2011-12-22
    Location : Greece

    Re: 2S35 Koalitsiya-SV 152mm

    Post  George1 on Tue Dec 23, 2014 10:26 pm



    Double barrel cannon testing for Koalitsiya-SV.
    avatar
    collegeboy16

    Posts : 1175
    Points : 1184
    Join date : 2012-10-05
    Age : 20
    Location : Roanapur

    Re: 2S35 Koalitsiya-SV 152mm

    Post  collegeboy16 on Thu Dec 25, 2014 7:27 pm

    good, more dakka is always good Twisted Evil

    ult

    Posts : 648
    Points : 688
    Join date : 2015-02-20

    Re: 2S35 Koalitsiya-SV 152mm

    Post  ult on Tue Feb 24, 2015 6:38 pm

    New pics of the 2S35 Coalition-SV



    avatar
    Zivo

    Posts : 1491
    Points : 1521
    Join date : 2012-04-13
    Location : U.S.A.

    Re: 2S35 Koalitsiya-SV 152mm

    Post  Zivo on Tue Feb 24, 2015 8:49 pm

    What chassis is it on?
    avatar
    TR1

    Posts : 5680
    Points : 5708
    Join date : 2011-12-06

    Re: 2S35 Koalitsiya-SV 152mm

    Post  TR1 on Tue Feb 24, 2015 8:52 pm

    Modified T-90.
    avatar
    Zivo

    Posts : 1491
    Points : 1521
    Join date : 2012-04-13
    Location : U.S.A.

    Re: 2S35 Koalitsiya-SV 152mm

    Post  Zivo on Tue Feb 24, 2015 8:59 pm

    TR1 wrote:Modified T-90.

    It kind of looks that way.

    Do you know if it was purpose built for Coalition or pulled from another design?
    avatar
    TR1

    Posts : 5680
    Points : 5708
    Join date : 2011-12-06

    Re: 2S35 Koalitsiya-SV 152mm

    Post  TR1 on Tue Feb 24, 2015 9:39 pm

    Zivo wrote:
    TR1 wrote:Modified T-90.

    It kind of looks that way.

    Do you know if it was purpose built for Coalition or pulled from another design?

    Specially for Coalition AFAIK.
    avatar
    George1

    Posts : 10529
    Points : 11006
    Join date : 2011-12-22
    Location : Greece

    Re: 2S35 Koalitsiya-SV 152mm

    Post  George1 on Tue Feb 24, 2015 10:05 pm

    TR1 wrote:Modified T-90.

    actually a T-72
    avatar
    magnumcromagnon

    Posts : 4488
    Points : 4661
    Join date : 2013-12-05
    Location : Pindos ave., Pindosville, Pindosylvania, Pindostan

    Re: 2S35 Koalitsiya-SV 152mm

    Post  magnumcromagnon on Wed Feb 25, 2015 12:12 am

    TR1 wrote:
    Zivo wrote:
    TR1 wrote:Modified T-90.

    It kind of looks that way.

    Do you know if it was purpose built for Coalition or pulled from another design?

    Specially for Coalition AFAIK.

    It's a test bed. It's no different than when a fighter jet's radar or engine is tested on a passenger plane.
    avatar
    TR1

    Posts : 5680
    Points : 5708
    Join date : 2011-12-06

    Re: 2S35 Koalitsiya-SV 152mm

    Post  TR1 on Wed Feb 25, 2015 1:59 am

    George1 wrote:
    TR1 wrote:Modified T-90.

    actually a T-72

    T-90 chassis has slightly different dimensions than T-72.
    avatar
    TR1

    Posts : 5680
    Points : 5708
    Join date : 2011-12-06

    Re: 2S35 Koalitsiya-SV 152mm

    Post  TR1 on Wed Feb 25, 2015 6:02 am

    http://gurkhan.blogspot.com/2015/02/235.html

    Some nice pics of the muzzle break and the corrective fuses.
    avatar
    TR1

    Posts : 5680
    Points : 5708
    Join date : 2011-12-06

    Re: 2S35 Koalitsiya-SV 152mm

    Post  TR1 on Wed Feb 25, 2015 6:04 am


    Sponsored content

    Re: 2S35 Koalitsiya-SV 152mm

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Mon Oct 23, 2017 4:38 am