Darn! It's M46, not D-30.

Wouldn't three be better?

 

Nice.

 

...and a complete 180º left-to-right rotation of that original pic I posted up at the beginning.

 

The photoshop scam is obvious here: look how distorted/disproportionate (sp?) the center barrel is compared to the upper and lower ones.

(notice the mis-alignment of the recoil sleeves, look at the center one compared to the other two. And where would the third barrel have its recoil mechanisms/recuperators to begin with? And one can look at the trunnion elevation race and see the curve is all wrong to allow the guns to elevate at all- just between the upper and center barrel, it almost looks "stepped".)

 

For the record, Tony William's site briefly mentioned something of Russian naval interest in a new naval gun for its destroyers and cruisers.

Seen a conceptual drawing in (Armada? Jane's?) some recent mag last week, showing a somewhat larger turret showing over/under guns, and compares the mount to the current twin 130 side-by-side (decades ago-1960s/1970s, there were 37mm and 76mm over-under installations on a few Russian Fast Attack Boats, and there was an early OTO Melara 76mm over/under turret before they settled on the universally-known single barrel Super Rapide turret).

But I couldn't exactly say the proposal/concept was actually 152mm or 130mm.

Of course, it may all be more hype spawned by TW's site...

 

Anyone who has an active Jane's Defence Weekly subscription (or who may know the magazine I saw), please let us know if they happen to mention anything of it.

 

Photoshop scam to begin with?

Sure it could be.

 

But until AMOS came around, no one would've believed a twin barrel 120mm gun mortar, either (early AMOS concepts even suggested quad barrels, see page 600 of the 1997-98 Jane's Armour & Artillery, showing what looks like an open-topped turret mounted on an Ikv-91 chassis).

 

 

It could still have an export market. The Iranians would love it.