Coalition-SV is very interesting design and approach to a problem with increasing rate of fire. We all know that intensive fire rate make gun barrel hot, and this is not good, two guns in one turret permitts to increase rate of fire without increasing (at least to some point) gun barrel temperature.
It is definetly a simpler, probably also cheaper solution than US choice in XM2001 with liquid cooled barrel, on the other hand Coalition-SV is very big compared to XM2001 or other self-proppeled howitzers, well it seems that there are no perfect solutions.
Question to Russian users, Coalitions-SV will be based on modified 2S19 hull or new hull will be designed? Rumors were saying that it should be based on Object-195 but as far as we know new tank will not be produced in nearest future, instead a simpler and cheaper "Armata" should be fielded so it is possible that it's hull will be a base for new SPH?
I had a feeling tha it'ii have a Gast scheme of reload lol.
Aww and I never thought they already gone that far. Good enough. Time to wait for percise munnition for this monster and it will be kick-ass mutterhacker!
Talking about dual barrel I thought it was arguable descigion because when you shoot from the first barrel you have so massive recoil that (I believe) you have to aim again and it does not metter wether you shoot from the second barrel or from the first one. The only thing is like Damian allready said is reduction of barrel overheat afaI think. Althou I am not an artillerist and it could be dilletant suppositions. Correct me if I'm wrong.
Uploaded with ImageShack.us
Last edited by IDA_71; 06-20-2011 at 03:11 PM.
According to Dal's dictionary rossiyane is an old equivalent of russkie. You could see it for example in Karamzin's works.
But yep, this thread is not about that.
A decent artillery calculation computer can easily make up for that.Talking about dual barrel I thought it was arguable descigion because when you shoot from the first barrel you have so massive recoil that (I believe) you have to aim again and it does not metter wether you shoot from one barrel or two. Althou I am not an artillerist and it could be dilletant suppositions. Correct me if I'm wrong.
Can't they develope a faster method, where you designate the target area, and based on your position and the targets position a computer aims and programs the shells automatically?
I think that airlifting is not a main problem here, and don't forget, XM2001 was too heavy (40 tons only but too heavy, get it?!) for Rumsfeld to be airlifted.Well, since the Russians don't need to have airlift capability in mind since they don't go halfway around the world to fight wars, I doubt that that's any problem.
However a big vehicle is not nececary good in any situation. This of course don't mean that Coalition-SV is a bad design, just a different solution to the same problem, and there are no perfect problem solutions as I said.
In modern day, Russky is a slav, Rossyianin is anyone with russian nationality.
OK, no more posts from now.
I always figured that a computer should be able to do everything that you do by hand today (calculations for aiming etc) automatically, aim the turret, adjust the azimut, account for movement after firing, programm the shells etc..
And about the areal, I didn't mean a massive area bombardement, but getting as many rounds as possible to hit a certain area (say, enemy artillery position, base, depot, fortification, command post etc) without wasting shells that fly too far away because of wind etc, basically that they can correct their course to not go to waste. You don't have to hit a specific vehicle, but those that you send should do damage in the area you want them to.