2S35 Koalitsiya-SV 152mm

Can't say I like the concept of the wheeled Armata; just don't see the use of it in mechanized formations.

Can't say I like the concept of the wheeled Armata; just don't see the use of it in mechanized formations.

By definition we are not talking about a wheeled armata. Armata by definition is a heavy tracked vehicle chassis with mobility and protection levels in the MBT range.

A wheeled Koalition can be used in independent artillery brigades... with a range of 70km it doesn't need to operate very close to the units it is supporting and therefore could forgo the requirements for protection.

In terms of costs a wheeled Koalition will be much much cheaper to buy and to operate and maintain, and while tactical mobility cross country would suffer, its theatre mobility would be impressive.

I rather suspect that the armata based Koalition would only be used in Armata brigades, and that in Kurganets and Boomerang-25 brigades they would use the wheeled version. For the Boomerang-10 brigades I rather suspect they will rely on the 120mm rifled gun/mortar for fire support.

BTW nice find TheArmenian... 200km for upgraded Smerch... that is impressive. They were talking about 120-150km with fold out wings to extend range, but 200km is a real leap in performance.

http://en.rian.ru/video/20121009/176505602.html
I know this one was linked. On page two but this is in english rather then russian.

Enjoy : o

Shadåw wrote:http://en.rian.ru/video/20121009/176505602.html
I know this one was linked. On page two but this is in english rather then russian.

Enjoy : o

Thanks Shadaw , gets my vote..

Mindstorm wrote:


In the meantime T-72B..... T-62 and even ....some T-55...was engaging Georgian ground forces, Russian Navy was destroying Georgian unities only with....P-120 Malakhit...and Russian aircraft avoided like hell the use even only of the most outdated versions of Kh-59 miissiles or KAB-L precision bomb series of which exist a stock pile more than sufficient to desroy several times all main military targets in both Europe and USA

I don't disagree with anything, save this: Have we any proof of massive Kh-59 stockpiles?
Disinformation is one thing, but in recent years we have seen a shocking openness in military procurement, tenders, bloggers visiting bases and newly bought equipment, etc etc. Munition corporations have published their domestic sales figures, I do not recall any significant Kh-59 or similar modern munition purchases.
Purchases of precision munitions restarted only recently, according to Tactical Missile Corps:

Kh-31:
2009: 146 units
2010: 75 units

3M-24 (Uran):
2009: 55 units
2010: 57 units




We don't see the missiles used on training exercises at all, our aircraft in 8-8-8 used 95% dumb munitions- and that is not a good scenario! Disinformation goes only so far, but you need to train the pilots and armed forces in regular depoyment of modern munitions. Further, had precision munition units been available for use in the Kavkaz theater (in a few years there will be sufficient Su-34s, Su-25SM3/4s, and Gefets upgraded Su-24s to make this a non-issue)the Georgian defeat would have been even heavier.
The rapid and utter incompetence of the Georgian army does not mask the valuable and real lessons learned by all branches during the war.
And it seems the politicians are slowly, learning that starving armed forces of funding to conduct modern operations against any sort of competent enemy will not lead to good results.

I am hoping the MOD does not cheap out, and the new systems entering service get the munitions that will allow them to reach their full potential.

I am hoping the MOD does not cheap out, and the new systems entering service get the munitions that will allow them to reach their full potential.

Well lets face it, the primary user of air launched guided ground attack weapons was the Su-24.

Now that there are aircraft getting upgrades and of course new aircraft entering service it makes more sense to equip them with guided weapons to maximise performance and keep them safer from ground fire.

Just a slight observation, the chassis the Coalition uses has 7 roadwheels, compared to the 6 we saw on the support Armata. Perhaps the coalition uses a lengthened Armata chassis?

The model is not based on Armata's chassis, but 195's.

I don't disagree with anything, save this: Have we any proof of massive Kh-59 stockpiles?
Disinformation is one thing, but in recent years we have seen a shocking openness in military procurement, tenders, bloggers visiting bases and newly bought equipment, etc etc. Munition corporations have published their domestic sales figures, I do not recall any significant Kh-59 or similar modern munition purchases.
Purchases of precision munitions restarted only recently, according to Tactical Missile Corps:

Kh-31:
2009: 146 units
2010: 75 units

3M-24 (Uran):
2009: 55 units
2010: 57 units

TR1 something lead me to suspect that you have not a precise idea of what was the level of production of missiles and ammunitions in URSS times (from which come from the fearful stock inherited).

Only to provide to you a picture ,from open media sources, of the order of measure of which we talk about here i can only recall that ,after end of URSS, only Ukraine had inherited 1612...Kh-55 !!! (a strategic cruise missile immeasurably more costly and slow to produce in respect to tactical missiles......i repeat one more time :this is the residual stock of a strategic range cruise missile only in Ukraine.

Clear ?



Those type of orders in the latest years ,just like that highlighted in the Tactical Missile Corporation's annual report (anyhow very ,very, very far from a thruthful source for similar subjects) were obviously never generated by strategic needs ,but merely to mantain open the related production lines and mantain at work the connected specialized personnel.

This situation is dramatically changed -for ammunitions of any branch of Armed Forces - in latest years, in correspondence with the all-encompassing modernization plan and the completion and appearance of radically improved versions of weapons in any operative segment of employment, for not say of theirs carrying platforms.

This procurement process ,which follow a strict pyramidal order of priority (from strategic level's elements down up to new type of rifle's cartridges) will see a progressive acceleration in the course of SAP 2020's realization.

We don't see the missiles used on training exercises at all, our aircraft in 8-8-8 used 95% dumb munitions- and that is not a good scenario! Disinformation goes only so far, but you need to train the pilots and armed forces in regular deployment of modern munitions.

TR1 do you know the absurd number of KAB-1500/500L and KAB-1500/500Kr ,some of them even near the end of theirs operative live) was available to Russian Air Force in August 2008) ?
Well , now can you say to me how much of them has been employed ?

I have named this weapon only to provide an example ,among literally hundreds possible, of the comical absurdity of thesis, present in majority of western media, that attempted to "sell" to public opinion the very strict Intel-denial approach maintained by Russian Armed Forces during the entire operation in 2008 sustaining that Russian aircraft had not used any precision weapon because.....GPS had been rendered unserviceable in the area during the conflict


TR1 just to provide another piece of puzzle of this subtle ,but crucial, "Elint War" fought during August 2008's conflict i can mention that :

Montreux Convention limit the tonnage of military ships and submarines of not Black-Sea Powers that can pass the Bosporus Straits and Dardanelles at 45.000 tons in total of which 30.000 maximum from a single nation; moreover the notice of the passage of similar military vessels must be communicated to Turkey more than 15 days before.
Now, the passage of what ship (moreover occupying 18400 tons of the 30.000 maximum !!) was.....casually....communicated in advance of the conflict to Turkey's authorities and, after, passed as a....cargo ship to bring humanitarian aids to Georgia ?

TR1 respond to this question ,in particular examining what type of ship (and among those what ship in particular) US "selected" to carry out just this "humanitarian" mission ; i am sure that ,after, the apparent absurdity of the choice by part of USA to prepare and allow Georgia to embark in this hopeless adventure will find suddenly a clear solid rational foundation.



Note : Sorry for the late response but ,in the last two days, work has absorbed me completely.

Because they probably had this model sitting in storage for a few years.

Just a slight observation, the chassis the Coalition uses has 7 roadwheels, compared to the 6 we saw on the support Armata. Perhaps the coalition uses a lengthened Armata chassis?

To clarify the model shown of the Coalition has 7 road wheels, compared with 6 shown in the electronic models on armata platforms.

We have already been told there are two armata vehicle designs... one with the engine at the front and one with the engine at the rear. A front mounted engine is needed for the IFV model and would be useful in the artillery model because it would make loading easier.

Why would this bureau be interesting in putting the Coalition-SV on the Object 195 platform; when in fact the Armata chassis is what it's supposed to be based on?

The T-99 will have a lot of features from the T-95.

I rather suspect however it was more a case that the model for the Coalition was originally based on the T-95 chassis, and upgrades to the Coalition (which is a turret) don't effect the chassis so they left that as is.

In both cases the T-95 and T-99 are MBT level armoured vehicles with all three crew in the front hull with an unmanned turret.

Armata Coalition might have a front mounted engine or it might not... the point is the models are to show the turret, not the chassis.

Regarding coalition's configuration, remember these renderings?






I'm not saying they're accurate in away way, but the front engine hull is used on Coalition model.

Is it me or the gun system appears to be mounted on a m1931 203mm howitzer chassis xD

Is it me or the gun system appears to be mounted on a m1931 203mm howitzer chassis xD

The gun is actually a 152mm gun called Koalition-SG and is the topic of this thread.

It will likely also replace the Bereg coastal artillery system with GLONASS guided shells with a range of 70km.

All those chassis are the same, it is the turrets and systems that are different.

It would actually be interesting to speculate if they are going to have special brigades with heavy artillery like the 203mm guns and of course the 240mm Mortars they currently operate. They seemed to like the heavy mortars in mountainous country like the 160mm mortar that was kept for mountain units.

Unnmannng Arms. Makain New Gun. CanOpenenr3

All the new Russian vehicles will likely apply the concept of unmanned turrets with the crew in hull positions under the heaviest armour on the vehicle with the weapons and ammo separated from the crew compartments.

The result should be safer soldiers and crew... with the potential for easily adapting the vehicles to unmanned designs due to the digital nature of their design.

GarryB wrote:
The result should be safer soldiers and crew... with the potential for easily adapting the vehicles to unmanned designs due to the digital nature of their design.

Skynet says hi!

GarryB wrote:All the new Russian vehicles will likely apply the concept of unmanned turrets with the crew in hull positions under the heaviest armour on the vehicle with the weapons and ammo separated from the crew compartments.

The result should be safer soldiers and crew... with the potential for easily adapting the vehicles to unmanned designs due to the digital nature of their design.

It's much more intimidating to see a full size tank acting on its own than the cute unmanned ground vehicles some army's are going for today.

AFAIK some Russian Engineer vehicles already are able to be remote controlled on the battlefield for finding mines, or fording places in rivers.

I think the IMR-3 can already do this and I suspect the new armoured vehicles will have even better capabilities in this regard.... like plotting their position on a digital map and transmitting video and other information to the control position.

Armata is digital and I'm almost 100% it will operate with a complete drive-by-wire system by 2015. It won't matter if the input is from the sensors in the hull, i.e. the steering wheel, pedals, etc or from 2,000 miles away controlled by a crew in the back of a trailer.

The crew positions down in the hull means to operate the vehicles properly they need an array of cameras to give decent situational awareness. With such camera feeds giving such a good clear view it really doesn't matter whether the crew is in that vehicle or is somewhere else.

I will keep an eye on the graphics detail of MMO tank games from Russia... recruitment sites for the Russian military?

The Koalitsiya-SV 152-mm twin-barrel howitzer, based on the KamAZ-6560 platform, will premiere at the famed Nizhny Tagil tank show this September according to Izvestiya.




The Russian Defence Ministry has launched a programme to gradually replace tracked artillery pieces in its arsenal with wheeled types. Russia's first wheeled howitzer will be revealed to the public at the REA 2013 international military equipment exhibition in Nizhny Tagil in September.
KamAZ spokesman Oleg Afanasyev told Izvestiya that the new howitzer will be based on the four-axle KamAZ-6560 truck, which has a history of construction and military applications. The platform underwent minor modifications to accommodate the Koalitsiya piece, including the installation of a more powerful engine and a reinforced frame  to withstand the recoil.

"This is essentially the platform used in the Pantsir-S SAM system," Afanasyev explained. "It meets the factory and military specifications. It is also in production, which means there will be no production-entry hiccoughs."
According to Afanasyev, a prototype Koalitsiya platform has been shipped to the Motovilikhinskiye Zavody factory in Perm in Russian Urals, which manufactures the howitzer. Factory testing of the complete item is expected to last until late 2015, and will lead up to the official commissioning of the new weapon.
The new howitzer will reportedly be fully automatic, meaning that the crew will remain in the armoured cab for the loading and firing sequence.


Sources at the Defence Ministry told Izvestiya that the howitzer is primarily intended as an asset for assault and light mountain brigades, which require mobility and high road speeds. Lesser-priority recipients are medium brigades, which currently use wheeled armoured personnel carriers (APC) instead of tracked infantry fighting vehicles to transport personnel. Heavy brigades are expected to be armed with tracked vehicles, which are normally better armoured than wheeled vehicles.

Sources at the Missile Troops and Artillery Department of the Russian Ground Troops Command told Izvestiya that the KamAZ-based Koalitsiya howitzer would supplement the previously ordered superlight howitzer.
Independent military expert Vyacheslav Tseluyko says the Koalitsiya howitser will find limited use.

"This type of howitzer would best fit the needs of medium brigades with APCs, whose high share of wheeled vehicles and fairly high marching speed would warrant the addition of such an asset," he explains. "Tracked Msta-S howitzers or towed Msta-B howitzers would slow down the advance of a marching convoy within such units. On the other hand, the howitzer would prove useless for light brigades because it is too big to fit into an Mi-26 [transport helicopter], which is a mandatory parameter for light weapons [operated under the Russian military system]."
Tseluyko also notes that the Russian Ground Troops have previously attempted to develop a wheeled howitzer with the Msta-K barrel, but failed because the wheels were not sturdy enough to withstand the recoil loads.
The Koalitsiya-SV howitzer was developed by Nizhny Novgorod-based Burevestnik research institute, and entered production at Motovilikhinskiye Zavody in Perm.

Mock-ups of Koalitsiya family artillery systems, to be based on various chassis, were first demonstrated during Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Rogozin's visit to Perm in July 2012.
It was at that time that Motovilikhinskiye Zavody proposed its grounds as the venue for a federal centre of innovative artillery technology, which was expected at the time to include Burevestnik and Yekaterinburg-based Artillery Plant No 9.

Reminds me of the Czech Dana artillery in Wargame: European Escalation.

Any chance this was inspired by such a system?

Will be interesting to see if it has one barrel or two.

Part of the weight loss program for the tracked version involved the removal of the second barrel and its associated dual feed autoloader.

Interesting that this is going to be a wheeled version to operate with Boomerang brigades... impressive fire power addition, though I would not be surprised if it had less powerful ammo... no need for a light highly mobile force to fire at targets 70km away normally.

Any chance this was inspired by such a system?

No. They are developing new vehicle families in a brigade structure... when you create a wheeled family of vehicles like Boomerang, it makes sense to have all the vehicles that operate with it to also be wheeled so they have similar mobility characteristics.

The S-300 family of SAM systems is truck based because its mobility on roads is more relevant than its cross country mobility. The S-300V on the other hand is an Army system that needs to move with tanks and other vehicles so the S-300V family of vehicles are all tracked including the radar and support vehicles.

This vehicle is wheeled, not because the DANA or the South African G6 (both very good vehicles BTW) are wheeled, but because all the other vehicles it will be operating with will be wheeled.