http://www.army-technology.com/projects/atmos/

this is going into service 2009....any thoughts,espcially artillery guys?

Looks pretty good for your use.
High mobility, speed and good firepower

But wheels on Arty wouldn't work too good for us up north here..

Not much protection either either for the vehicle or crew. Small arms protection that's about it. Which means its going to have to need protection against everything, even a simple RPG might be enough to disable it.

The lack of treads is going to make it difficult to move off-road. I guess for the relatively flat areas of the Middle East it can work, but its going to be hindered for exports vs fully tracked and armored guns such as the M109 Paladin.

Probably won't get close enough for RPGs to be a factor and I'm guessing the manufacturers are relying on mobility to solve the counter battery fire problem.
Wheels... yeah it's going to have some issues in many kinds of terrain.

i tihnk the wheels arnt that big a deal, ive seen the truck that thing is based on going through terrain that you wouldent believe.

At first glance I'd say it looks like a pretty convenient high mobility artillery system, able to relocate itself at a rather high speed without the need for heavy transport units.

In the area where it's intended to operate I'd think it will perform well, the extreme off road capability of the tracked SPA's is rarely needed, and often exaggerated too.
And the Tatra truck is one of the more capabel trucks I know when it comes to driving in demanding terrain.
Off course it will sink like a hammer in muddy terrain, but so will allmost anything of the same weight, and driving in desert wouldn't be much of a challenge provided good maps and a proper team to scout the best way to drive.

How the trucks made in India will perform is unknown to me, but a Czeck made Tatra truck of mil.spec. is a spectacular weapon platform in my opinion.

actually the probable theatere of operations is not the desert, its the Golan. and it is very muddy in winter and spring.

Well, then I suggest you guys sit tight during winter and spring..

The Golan...isn't that mostly fixed positions anyway?
Always thought of that as a defensive line.

well, IDF dosent really fight well from fixed positions(i think no one dose).

I know, that's why some refer to it as IAF instead of IDF.

As for holding defensive positions...it's mostly just a matter of time.

The Maginot Line didn't hold, as the Germans went around and came in from behind, and Eben Emanuel din't hold, Fort Sumter didn't hold, The Atlantic Wall and "Festung Europa" didn't hold, the Mongols bribed their way through the Great Wall of China, Hadrians Wall didn't help much, and the Golani heights didn't hold when IDF chose to take it from Syria...

So basicly a defensive position is just a stopgap in order to buy time to build up sufficient strength for a counterattack on an attackting enemy.
People who has been living and hiding behind walls, and relying on them for their sole defense have mostly perished.

Then comes the question, why would the IDF place highly mobile artillery units on the Golani Heights, if the doctrine of defensive warfare is rendered obsolete...

I know what I would answer if asked, but I can also imagine what certain people would think, and try to turn it into in a debate...
Better not feed the trolls.