2S35 Koalitsiya-SV 152mm

Wow, some rumored info:

-Chassis is indeed modified T-90. Strengthened to withstand fire stress, system is long ready and waiting for Armata chassis.
-Turret is entirely unmanned.
-Combustible modular ammunition.
-New fire control system, with radar on the chassis that communicates with the shell fuse.
-Currently testing rounds @ 48km range.
-New EMP rounds among the whole brand new ammo selection.

TR1 wrote:Wow, some rumored info:

-Chassis is indeed modified T-90. Strengthened to withstand fire stress, system is long ready and waiting for Armata chassis.
-Turret is entirely unmanned.
-Combustible modular ammunition.
-New fire control system, with radar on the chassis that communicates with the shell fuse.
-Currently testing rounds @ 48km range.
-New EMP rounds among the whole brand new ammo selection.

That combustible case (I assume fully combustible ala MBT-70's shell) looks awesome. So hopefully there would be nothing to extract. I wonder if Russian tanks will also feature such propellant charge

The EMP Round is also interesting. It must used some form of Flux Compression generator.

What are the covers on the gun (mantlet I suppose?) and on the rear of the turret for on those previous pictures? Is it classified hardware or simple weather/dust proofing?

Just covering up the reloading device. They made a whole new reloading truck for it.

"Coalition" goes on parade





Can anyone recognize the chassis?

George1 wrote:Can anyone recognize the chassis?

As the following from the other thread is relevant, I'll repost it here.

As can be seen the spacing between the road wheels is larger than those of the T-90 family. Assuming that the road wheels are of the same type/size as those of the T-90 family, it follows that the hull is larger/longer than the T-90 family. Of course, this makes sense, as an SP artillery piece has a much lower average mass density than a tank.

In other words, 2 X 6 road wheels of this type is perfectly sufficient for ~50+ tonnes, but, of course, the hull should be larger/longer to meet the requirements of this kind of artillery piece.

Modified T-90. Confirmed on multiple reliable sources.

Looks lower profile than the Msta-S. amirite?

Still a big heavy thing though. Guess we can forget about seeing it on the Kurganets-25 or Bumerang.

flamming_python wrote:Looks lower profile than the Msta-S. amirite?

Still a big heavy thing though. Guess we can forget about seeing it on the Kurganets-25 or Bumerang.

Well likely there wont be a 152mm Koalition for Kurganets and Boomerang, but instead a 120mm Koalition for the smaller platforms.

https://i.imgur.com/mmW4dbq.jpg

Higher res of that earlier photo.

TR1 wrote:Wow, some rumored info:

-Chassis is indeed modified T-90. Strengthened to withstand fire stress, system is long ready and waiting for Armata chassis.
-Turret is entirely unmanned.
-Combustible modular ammunition.
-New fire control system, with radar on the chassis that communicates with the shell fuse.
-Currently testing rounds @ 48km range.
-New EMP rounds among the whole brand new ammo selection.

Ok, if it is indeed a modified T-90 chassis...where does the crew sit?
The T-90 chassis can take only one person (the driver/mechanic).

TR1 wrote:Modified T-90. Confirmed on multiple reliable sources.

Seemingly not according to the above images, irrespective of what the "reliable" "historians" say.

I am wondering why the "reliable" "historians" doesn't say the chassis is a T-44 chassis.

The hull interior is gutted. No carousel for one so there is plenty crew space.

TR1 wrote:The hull interior is gutted. No carousel for one so there is plenty crew space.

Well, if you change the road wheel spacings, lengthen the hull, change the engine, change the transmission to an electromechanical transmission (just saying), change the seating arrangement, reduce the armor thickness to 2 cm, ..., then why do you say it uses a T-90 chassis?

Russia’s Newest Howitzers to Participate in Victory Day Parade

The secret 2S35 Koalitsiya-SV howitzers were sent to Moscow to take part in a military parade. According to previous reports, the Ural Plant of Transport Engineering (Yekaterinburg) had to produce 12 2S35 Koalitsiya-SV self-propelled howitzers in 2013-2014 to participate in the military parade on May 9, 2015.

It’s worth mentioning that the 2S35 Koalitsiya-SV howitzer is a new Russian self-propelled howitzer. In 2013, two prototypes of the Koalitsiya self-propelled gun were manufactured to participate in the trials. There is also an option known as 2S35-1 Koalitsiya-SV-KSh. JSC KAMAZ published a picture of its wheeled variant based on the KAMAZ-6560 truck chassis on April 4, 2013. The prototype of the wheeled self-propelled gun is currently at the stage of manufacturing.

https://rostechnologiesblog.wordpress.com/2015/03/06/russias-newest-howitzers-to-participate-in-victory-day-parade/

Is that a FCS radar next to cannon?

Morpheus Eberhardt wrote:

TR1 wrote:The hull interior is gutted. No carousel for one so there is plenty crew space.

Well, if you change the road wheel spacings, lengthen the hull, change the engine, change the transmission to an electromechanical transmission (just saying), change the seating arrangement, reduce the armor thickness to 2 cm, ..., then why do you say it uses a T-90 chassis?

Nothing else, thats why.
You are speculating on most of those changes btw, just wait until we see the uncovered vehicle.
There was that universal T-90 chassis:

http://i58.fastpic.ru/big/2013/1029/71/b2fc4a0e5b1df811e048575d51e67a71.jpg

Which had space for more crew in the hull. It is not exactly a hard solution. Same with armor.

Armata is well known to not be ready for Koalition yet.

Morpheus Eberhardt wrote:

TR1 wrote:The hull interior is gutted. No carousel for one so there is plenty crew space.

Well, if you change the road wheel spacings, lengthen the hull, change the engine, change the transmission to an electromechanical transmission (just saying), change the seating arrangement, reduce the armor thickness to 2 cm, ..., then why do you say it uses a T-90 chassis?

Nothing else, thats why.
You are speculating on most of those changes btw, just wait until we see the uncovered vehicle.
There was that universal T-90 chassis:

http://i58.fastpic.ru/big/2013/1029/71/b2fc4a0e5b1df811e048575d51e67a71.jpg

Which had space for more crew in the hull. It is not exactly a hard solution. Same with armor.

Armata is well known to not be ready for Koalition yet.

Werewolf wrote:Is that a FCS radar next to cannon?

Look over last few pages, info about that.

TR1 wrote:

Morpheus Eberhardt wrote:

TR1 wrote:The hull interior is gutted. No carousel for one so there is plenty crew space.

Well, if you change the road wheel spacings, lengthen the hull, change the engine, change the transmission to an electromechanical transmission (just saying), change the seating arrangement, reduce the armor thickness to 2 cm, ..., then why do you say it uses a T-90 chassis?

Nothing else, thats why.
You are speculating on most of those changes btw, just wait until we see the uncovered vehicle.
There was that universal T-90 chassis:

http://i58.fastpic.ru/big/2013/1029/71/b2fc4a0e5b1df811e048575d51e67a71.jpg

Which had space for more crew in the hull. It is not exactly a hard solution. Same with armor.

Armata is well known to not be ready for Koalition yet.

The image you posted is not a T-90 chassis. I believe it was called Eh300. It has some commonality with T-90, for example, it is using T-90's road wheels. In reality the differences it has with a T-90 chassis is what I listed above, except for that of the electromechanical transmission.

A tank chassis is never suitable for an SP artillery system like Koalitsiya. A heavily modified tank chassis is a different matter.

Anyway, what I am saying is that the road wheel spacing in the latest pictures seem to be larger than those in the T-90; so the chassis can't be just a downarmored variant of a T-90 chassis.

Patience guys, in 2 months we will see with our eyes everything

George1 wrote:Patience guys, in 2 months we will see with our eyes everything

And what are we going to find out in 2 months' time?

Morpheus Eberhardt wrote:

George1 wrote:Patience guys, in 2 months we will see with our eyes everything

And what are we going to find out in 2 months' time?

if it is T-90 chassis or not

George1 wrote:

Morpheus Eberhardt wrote:

George1 wrote:Patience guys, in 2 months we will see with our eyes everything

And what are we going to find out in 2 months' time?

if it is T-90 chassis or not

Don't the pictures you posted show that, at least the vehicles in those pictures, don't use a T-90 chassis? What they actually use is a different matter.