MSTA Self-propelled howitzer

2S19M1-MSTA
Self-propelled howitzer
Procuder: Ural plant of transport
machinery engineering

The 152 mm self-propelled howitzer 2C19
is a modern combat tracked vehicle with
powerful armament, NB protection, high
mobility and it conforms to all modern
artillery requirements.

Specifications.

Physical:
Weight - 43000 kg

Dimensions:
Length - 12.42 m
Width - 3.38 m
Height - 2.98 m
Clearance - 0.45 m
Crew - Five

Power Pack:
Engine - 780/840 hp V12 diesel
Transmission - Mechanical, 7 forward 1 reverse gears
Power/Weight
Ratio - 19 hp/tonne
Speed - 60 km/h
Mobility:
Gradient - 47%
Vertical Obstacle - 0.5 m
Trench Crossing - 2.8 m
Road Range - 500 km

Ordnance:
Calibre - 155 mm
Barrel Length - 52 calibre
Rates of Fire:
Sustained - 6- 8 rds/min.
Arc of Fire:
Elevation - From- 4ш to +68ш
Traverse - 360ш
Max. Firing range:
HE projectile:
30 F 45 - 30.0 km (L15A)
HE-BB projectile
30F61 - 41.0 km (ERFB BB)
Krasnopol- M - 17
Ammunition carried - 46 rounds

Category:

Autos & Vehicles

Tags:

• Tank
• MSTA
• Self-propelled
• howitzer
• мста
• BMPT
• БМПТ
• russia
• ussr
• t-90
• t-72
• t-80
• M1
• Abrams

[pipotherium]

Only thing I don"t like is the gunner's moustache !

[Longliveputin122]

no it wouldent this spg can hit or dissable the abrams from 8000 meters

[SpaceAgeDiaper]

...rounds. While a tank moving a fuck ton faster, with a lot more agility than a falling piece of metal, could easily take out a stationary artillery unit. But of course this situation would never happen. So, since they wont. Bo point in stressing any further discussion. So drop it. Its YouTube Comments. Not Mcblind fuck be stupid happy go go time.

[SpaceAgeDiaper]

But more importantly. You assume the US would blindly send tanks into an area with gunships, or even planes. You can't send in tanks by themselves. It is something that requires a co-op effort. I don't even really know what this argument is about. But I appreciate how you came at me like your the all knowing genius, along with that insulting me for no apparent reason. But if the whole discussion is one artillery piece, vs ANY tank. The tank would win every single time. Artillery fires INDIRECT

[SpaceAgeDiaper]

I don't think you realize I posted this over a year ago. I don't even have a clue what I said. But looks like you use Google a lot. Go you.

[asease1234]

"WTF LOL" fucking nerd -.- and you stupid fuck think that other countrys doesnt have SPA systems? and remember that russian technology sucks when compared to countrys like usa, japan, german and so on

[asease1234]

ummm youre stupid... looks like you dont know about warfare, and you didnt even understand what i mean haha, typical russian...

[russiantanksrule]

that's US english. i speak UK english. Well, any conventional artillery weapon should be capable of defeating enemy tanks from afar, for their shells come from above, meaning they're capable of engaging tanks at where they're weakest, top armour. however, if an abrams does manage to get in range of the MSTA, the MSTA will either lose, or if the MSTA fires directly at it, it'll emerge victorious

[bittemeinrammstein]

enemy armor**

[bittemeinrammstein]

umm... do you really think the Abrams would get within fireing range of this beast with out getting hammered by an A2G missile or tank? HAHA anyway the MSTA-S can fire a laser guided NLOS round and kill and Abrams from over 35mi. away XD moron

[bittemeinrammstein]

you fucking retard, your arguing over an Abrams vs. an Artillery piece... WTF is your malfunction? LOL anyway... in its defence the MSTA-S can fire a laser guided NLOS round and kill an Abrams from over 30mi. away dumbass XD you dont really think the Abrams would get within fireing range of this beast anyway before it gets taken out by an A2G missile or tank do you? HAHA if so your sadly mistaken

[bittemeinrammstein]

LOL