Military Review

The British will form "shock brigades" to confront the latest Russian technology

140
Britain will form two mobile “shock brigades” equipped with combat vehicles on the Ajax platform, designed to “repel Russian aggression” using tanks "Armata" and armored vehicles "Kurganets."


The British will form "shock brigades" to confront the latest Russian technology


Each of the new brigades will include two armored reconnaissance regiments equipped with combat vehicles on the Ajax platform (with a total number of 100 units).

According to British Minister of Defense Michael Fallon, “a special experimental group is planned for 2017 for the year, which will finalize the concept of shock brigades and use Ajax family vehicles on the battlefield.”

By 2020 g must be formed a full-fledged team. "The new military units will be a mobile reserve that can be transferred in a matter of hours to any region of Europe, from Romania to the Baltic States," to stop a possible invasion of Russian troops, explained in the British agency.

Total British military ordered 589 combat vehicles, which are, in fact, light tanks, armed with 40-mm automatic cannons using ammunition of a new generation. Guns firing rate - up to 200 shots / min. It is claimed that the new shells are capable of piercing armor up to 100 mm. The combat weight of Ajax is about 38 t.

Russian experts doubt the effectiveness of the teams being created.

Military expert Alexei Khlopotov: “Why this car is needed is not clear. This is a cross between BMP and BRM. Arms are weak - like the BMP, but there is no landing. In addition, any modern BMP has anti-tank missiles. In this case, the weight and dimensions of the "Ajax", as in the end of the MBT 70-s. "

“The caliber 40 mm is good, but the telescopic shells do not cause delight in the military. Their effectiveness is overrated. We have, for example, the subject of telescopic shells for infantry fighting vehicles is closed, and Americans prefer to use classic ammunition. The gun itself is very damp and capricious. I carefully studied it at the exhibition. A lot of gears and machining. Any dirt or rag will result in seizure. Plus, an unreliable shells delivery scheme, ”said the expert.

“Against the background of hysteria in the media about the threat from“ Almaty ”, replacing the regiment“ Challengers ”with“ Ajax ”is a very strange decision. "Ajax" will look good at the parade, but they are not suitable for a big war. Apparently, the British military just had to urgently demonstrate to the public that they were taking measures in response to the “military threat” from the Russian Federation, so they went on this dubious experiment, ”concluded Khlopotov.
Photos used:
http://sandrermakoff.livejournal.com
140 comments
Ad

Subscribe to our Telegram channel, regularly additional information about the special operation in Ukraine, a large amount of information, videos, something that does not fall on the site: https://t.me/topwar_official

Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Dezinto
    Dezinto 26 December 2016 10: 42
    +18
    Well, they have nothing else to do.

    in response to the "military threat" from the Russian Federation


    Do their housewives still not embroider such sweaters with such inscriptions? not?

    1. himRa
      himRa 26 December 2016 10: 50
      +7
      And let these two brigades be sent closer to us! For example, to Europe ...
      quite a long time naglican not clicked on the nose!
      1. bouncyhunter
        bouncyhunter 26 December 2016 11: 07
        +15
        Brits continue to have nervous diarrhea over the "Russian threat"? So it is not necessary to create teams, but to increase the production and purchase of diapers! lol
        1. cniza
          cniza 26 December 2016 11: 10
          +5
          Hi Pasha, and they also want money, for free and more.
          1. bouncyhunter
            bouncyhunter 26 December 2016 11: 14
            +7
            Hello ! Of course you want: "there are mattresses, they are sawing. And why are we worse?" laughing
    2. Samen
      Samen 26 December 2016 10: 52
      +3
      Whatever the child is amusing herself with, if only she does not hang herself ...
      1. Butt
        Butt 26 December 2016 15: 05
        +4


        Wehrmacht instruction 1943. With an ax on a tank. The Germans were already studying with us by 1943, Ajax is not an obstacle !!!
        1. electrooleg
          electrooleg 27 December 2016 15: 47
          0
          With an ax on a tank it is illegal! laughing
          1. The stranger
            The stranger 27 December 2016 20: 01
            0
            Maybe. But effective against cardboard Armata. Ajax’s gun is redundant.
            150 ton Ajax-2 with a double-barreled shotgun is better.
  2. aszzz888
    aszzz888 26 December 2016 10: 49
    +3
    "Ajax" will look good on the parade, but they are not suitable for a big war.


    That's good. Let them rivet more. More dough will leave the treasury. bully
  3. NEXUS
    NEXUS 26 December 2016 10: 49
    +10
    It is strange that such news is taken seriously by someone. England is an island. What kind of Armata and Kurgan men threaten them? Moreover, London has a "chain dog" in the form of the US military machine.
    1. himRa
      himRa 26 December 2016 11: 10
      +3
      They pay more to the United States than for the 2nd World War. The British paid off only in this century! despite the fact that they gave almost all the overseas lands to the Americans!
    2. BARKHAN
      BARKHAN 26 December 2016 15: 40
      0
      Quote: NEXUS
      It is strange that such news is taken seriously by someone. England is an island. What kind of Armata and Kurgan men threaten them? Moreover, London has a "chain dog" in the form of the US military machine.

      If not on their island, then their presence on our land suggests itself ... What other options?
      Two times we already had them in history. So, there is nothing incredible. We will meet this time, as it should ...
    3. Shurik70
      Shurik70 26 December 2016 22: 43
      +1
      Quote: NEXUS
      London has a "chain dog" in the form of the US war machine.

      It was once a "chain dog".
      Now the roles have changed, and the Angles are a chain runner-up errand runner in the USA
      Whoever has more gold reserves is the "asset" in this sexual alliance
    4. The stranger
      The stranger 27 December 2016 20: 05
      0
      Putin threatens their ancestral canned sprat breeding factories in the Urals. They know better.
  4. Holoy
    Holoy 26 December 2016 10: 54
    0
    Khlopotov lagged behind ...

    Spike type ATGM makes any tank an expensive burden!
    1. svp67
      svp67 26 December 2016 10: 59
      +3
      Quote: Holoy
      Spike type ATGM makes any tank an expensive burden!

      But the tanks don't know about it yet. Since an ATGM of the "Spike" type is a very expensive toy for any military budget ... it is also not clear how it will show itself in a confrontation with the same "Trophy" or "Afghanit"
      1. Holoy
        Holoy 26 December 2016 11: 02
        0
        Cheaper than a tank, and the Armata for sure ...

        Tanks are already Anachranism ... in Africa, only use ...

        If the Rocket hits from above ... then nothing will save the tank ...
        1. svp67
          svp67 26 December 2016 11: 03
          +11
          Quote: Holoy
          Tanks are already Anachranism ..

          Yeah, you tell the infantry ...
          And in general I am amazed, a man posing as a special forces officer of the Pacific Fleet often carries SUCH nonsense.
          1. Holoy
            Holoy 26 December 2016 11: 05
            0
            what should I say then? If the tanks in Grozny and Syria were almost all knocked out ...
            1. svp67
              svp67 26 December 2016 11: 06
              +11
              Quote: Holoy
              and what should I say then? If the tanks in Grozno and Syria almost all were knocked out ...

              After that, it's better and keep quiet ... Maybe you will pass for a smart one. Stop raving.
              1. Holoy
                Holoy 26 December 2016 11: 09
                0
                This is your opinion, but I just know. In Grozny, in the end, they did not take the city with tanks, but assault groups without tanks, but with Bumblebees ... And in Syria, there were practically no T-72s ... T-55s were removed from the conservation. ..
                1. svp67
                  svp67 26 December 2016 11: 15
                  +3
                  Quote: Holoy
                  In Grozny, in the end, the city was not taken by tanks, but by assault groups without tanks, oh with Bumblebees ...

                  Yeah, of course ... You have forgotten about bare hands and teeth. There was no support for "armor", the artillery was silent ...
                  Quote: Holoy
                  .And in Syria, there were almost no T-72 ... they removed from the conservation of T-55 ...

                  And what does this mean? Only that the war does not do without losses, and conducting hostilities, the state must understand how it will make up for them.
                  1. Holoy
                    Holoy 26 December 2016 11: 25
                    0
                    Quote: svp67
                    Yeah, of course ... You have forgotten about bare hands and teeth. There was no support for "armor", the artillery was silent ...

                    You probably don't understand what a Bumblebee is ...
                    1. svp67
                      svp67 26 December 2016 11: 31
                      +4
                      Quote: Holoy
                      You probably don't understand what a Bumblebee is ...

                      I can upset you, I perfectly understand the possibilities of this RPO. It's just that he is not a panacea for solving certain problems ... Moreover, the infantry does not have him, he is in the RChBZ units on equipment.
                      1. Holoy
                        Holoy 26 December 2016 11: 49
                        0
                        I understand everything, I'm talking about Assault Groups, and what are you talking about?
                2. Vadim237
                  Vadim237 26 December 2016 11: 19
                  0
                  Yes, in Syria, the troops have lost, probably, already 80 percent of all armored vehicles - from being hit by an ATGM - almost all of them are burning like a candle.
                  1. Holoy
                    Holoy 26 December 2016 11: 22
                    0
                    Quote: Vadim237
                    Yes, in Syria, the troops have lost, probably, already 80 percent of all armored vehicles - from being hit by an ATGM - almost all of them are burning like a candle.

                    But for some reason, many do not understand this ...
                    1. svp67
                      svp67 26 December 2016 11: 27
                      +9
                      Quote: Holoy
                      But for some reason, many do not understand this ...

                      Because BRED is hard to understand ...
                    2. KaPToC
                      KaPToC 26 December 2016 17: 16
                      +1
                      Shall we switch to horse traction? So it's even easier to kill a horse. What are your options?
                      1. The stranger
                        The stranger 27 December 2016 20: 22
                        +1
                        There are few options. Donkey cravings. A donkey is smaller than a horse - it is more difficult to hit it. In addition, they are smarter than lackeys, which is priceless in war.
                  2. svp67
                    svp67 26 December 2016 11: 27
                    +1
                    Quote: Vadim237
                    Yes, in Syria, the troops have probably lost 80 percent

                    The most compelling argument you have is "PROBABLY" ...
                    And do not tell for WHAT PERIOD such losses? And how many tanks were received in the same time to compensate for the losses?
                    Name at least one tank building plant in Syria.
                    1. Vadim237
                      Vadim237 26 December 2016 13: 26
                      0
                      "And do not tell for WHAT PERIOD such losses" - Over the five years of the war, and the first two years of ATGMs were little used, but since 2013 the ATGM TOU "switched on" and the losses of armored vehicles sharply went to the top and began to shoot from it in general, all over, starting from a crowd of people, ending with helicopters and airplanes at airfields - another two or three years of such a war and Assad's troops will lose all armored vehicles in general. And 80 percent includes non-repairable equipment - donors.
                      1. svp67
                        svp67 26 December 2016 13: 33
                        +3
                        Quote: Vadim237
                        In five years of war

                        You yourself answered. Five years of the most intense war, in fact, without replenishment, no one will have tanks here ...
                        Quote: Vadim237
                        And 80 percent includes non-repairable equipment - donors.

                        But the numbers are more accurate. How the Syrians are able to throw FULLY serviceable tanks is no longer a secret. As well as to whom they fall into the hands. And yet they have tanks on the battlefield and there are still quite a few of them. So, don't panic ahead of time. Something tells me that there are ENOUGH tanks for Assad, EXACTLY until the victory.
                3. Lopatov
                  Lopatov 26 December 2016 11: 56
                  +2
                  You have managed to mix in one heap both the "New Year's parade" of the First Chechen War and the competent cleaning of the city of the Second War.
                  From the first they took losses, from the second - the effective actions of the infantry, which simply could not be carried out without tanks.
                4. cosmos111
                  cosmos111 26 December 2016 20: 15
                  0

                  Quote: Holoy
                  .And in Syria, there were almost no T-72 ... they removed from the conservation of T-55 ...

                  Do you own a topic? Or do you write from a bold?
                  Firstly, in the SAA almost everywhere T-72 of various modifications, in the Guard T-90, T72 AB, T-72Б.
                  At "pilgrims" and militias. T-55,62.
            2. himRa
              himRa 26 December 2016 11: 14
              +12
              After WWI, they also said that artillery is an anachronism! laughing do not believe what they say! it was also written on the fence ... and there was firewood!
            3. NEXUS
              NEXUS 26 December 2016 13: 35
              +4
              Quote: Holoy
              what should I say then? If the tanks in Grozny and Syria were almost all knocked out ...

              Dear, let's start by recalling the general state of the Russian army at the time of the campaign in Grozny. And also remember what kind of drug was then in our army. Conscripts who served two years against hardened mercenaries and financial support from the West. Hence the losses both in drugs and in technology. There is no need to pull the cat in one place and pick out what is not clear from the nose.
              Quote: Holoy
              and Syria, almost all were knocked out ...

              Is it okay that the war has been going on in Syria for 6 years? And all against all? Or do you think that in a war, the replenishment of armored vehicles goes on by itself? Where do the Syrians get new tanks from? At the same time, there is a lot of information that says about the location of our T-90A in Syria.
              Quote: Holoy
              Tanks are already Anachranism ... in Africa, only use ...

              Of course an anachronism. wassat lol Only without the support of armor, will you go to clear and take the city or fortify the area?
              Stop raving, dear. All the world powers are modernizing this anachronism, and after the appearance of Armata they are trying to create their tanks in the manner of the T-14.
          2. Evgen2x
            Evgen2x 26 December 2016 12: 05
            +6
            "And in general I am amazed, a man posing as a special forces officer of the Pacific Fleet often carries SUCH nonsense."
            Firstly, I agree about the nonsense, and secondly: the Pacific Fleet's naval special forces were based on the Russky Island, in the Halulai Bay, but not like Holuay))) I have been there more than once, ten years ago I changed their deployment so I don’t know if they are still there, ummm, hardly a person who served could confuse the name))
            1. Holoy
              Holoy 26 December 2016 14: 37
              0
              Quote: Evgen2x
              in Halulay Bay, but not as Holuay

              I am glad that many have already dug up information ... two years ago no one even heard of it ... but what about the times of the USSR?

              Gee ... There are two more options for Translation from Chinese ... Haluai / Halulai ... But Correct: Holoy(lost place) hi

              Yes, and I'm not pretending to be anyone ... I don't need this ... I'm just commenting on topics here.

              1. An60
                An60 26 December 2016 15: 00
                0
                Exactly the Chinese name? I "served" a maximum of horse guides on Russky Island.
              2. Evgen2x
                Evgen2x 26 December 2016 19: 32
                0
                If not right then I apologize, but it was Halulai, the sailors called them, and they called them in the city. True, it was a long time ago.
                1. Holoy
                  Holoy 26 December 2016 19: 40
                  0
                  Yes, they could call it, they could call it whatever they like. All the more, everyone from different regions, everyone has their own pronunciation and perception. Saboteurs scared all the Sailors from the Ships in the Golden Horn Bay ... Minsk was torn off with a cable The propeller was torn off during exercises ... he was in the roadstead before leaving stood ...
            2. An60
              An60 26 December 2016 14: 58
              0
              The guys stayed there. And "a man posing as a special forces officer of the Pacific Fleet" -Kholui.
              1. Holoy
                Holoy 26 December 2016 15: 56
                +1
                And why are you getting personal? What do you care Hto I ??? It's not about me ...

                Apparently you're all in the complexes ... hi
                1. KaPToC
                  KaPToC 26 December 2016 17: 19
                  0
                  You yourself brought your personality as an argument, so do not be offended when your personality is sorted out on the shelves.
                  1. Holoy
                    Holoy 26 December 2016 18: 02
                    0
                    Have I been decomposed? It’s difficult ... almost impossible. Apart from childish babbling, there are no arguments ...
                    1. KaPToC
                      KaPToC 26 December 2016 21: 04
                      0
                      Quote: Holoy
                      And why are you getting personal?

                      Why then these indignations?
            3. BARKHAN
              BARKHAN 26 December 2016 15: 57
              0
              Quote: Evgen2x
              hardly a person who served could confuse the name so))

              No confusion, but if you only heard such a name and wrote it incorrectly, as it seems to him, then it is quite possible.
              I would like to know the version of what is happening from the HOLUAY himself.
          3. An60
            An60 26 December 2016 14: 53
            0
            He is as much a TOF member as a Baptist pastor, a sad whiner.
        2. The stranger
          The stranger 27 December 2016 20: 12
          0
          What is it like? Shouldn't they be deployed into battalion tactical groups of the size of a division? Or at least in the company, with the corps?
      2. Vadim237
        Vadim237 26 December 2016 11: 17
        0
        "Since the Spike ATGM is a very expensive toy for any military budget." But they are being bought - Poland bought 1000 Spike ATGMs and this amount of purchases will not be limited.
        1. svp67
          svp67 26 December 2016 11: 19
          +2
          Quote: Vadim237
          Poland has purchased 1000 Spike ATGMs and this amount of purchases will not be limited.

          Yes, for God's sake, it's their business where to spend money, and that's 250 thousand US dollars for each complex purchased from Israel and 133 thousand US dollars produced at home. The question is, will this help Poland?
          The first 100 missiles will be delivered to the ground forces in 2017, 300 each in 2018, 2019 and 2020.
          1. Vadim237
            Vadim237 26 December 2016 13: 30
            0
            The question is, will this help Poland? Of course it will help - any enemy armored vehicles and low-flying helicopters will be knocked out or destroyed - with maximum efficiency.
            1. svp67
              svp67 26 December 2016 16: 40
              0
              Quote: Vadim237
              Of course it will help - any enemy armored vehicles and low-flying helicopters will be knocked out or destroyed - with maximum efficiency

              Unfortunately no. Technique is technique.
            2. The stranger
              The stranger 27 December 2016 20: 48
              0
              Yeah ... On this they broke spears in the mid-80s, and no one else returned to this stupidity.
              Then, the motorized rifle battalions had a 120 mm m / m battery, an armored platoon (SPG-9 and Malyutki), ZRV (Strela-2M), and few had BMPs, most of them had BTR-60s or MTLBs. Attached to OTR, 10 tanks. It was already understood that there was not enough fire, and they began to think about how to strengthen it. According to the mind, it was necessary artillery, and then a party of leaders - jackets, who shouted to the skies that the battalions should be saturated - fed with anti-tank weapons to the teeth, arose, and everyone would be happy. And that these battalions would not live to see the tanks at all, when the artillery could be carried out for them from 10 kilometers - they had no time for the flashlight.
    2. Lopatov
      Lopatov 26 December 2016 11: 45
      0
      Quote: Holoy
      ATGM type Spike

      ...endangered species. With the appearance on the battlefield of armored objects with modern optical-electronic suppression systems and active protection systems.
      Expensive and useless.
      1. Holoy
        Holoy 26 December 2016 11: 48
        0
        So far useful ...
        1. Lopatov
          Lopatov 26 December 2016 11: 52
          0
          Well, yes, they will hold out for a while ... But such weapons systems are purchased for several decades ...
      2. voyaka uh
        voyaka uh 26 December 2016 11: 57
        +1
        "...endangered species"///

        He was just born, and you are in the endangered crying .
        Nobody has KAZs yet. As well as optoelectronic suppression. Or are you talking about the Curtain?
        It's easy to deceive her.
        So far, at the present time, the tanks are defenseless from above, like small children.
        1. svp67
          svp67 26 December 2016 12: 00
          0
          Quote: voyaka uh
          Nobody has KAZs yet. As well as optoelectronic suppression. Or are you talking about the Curtain?

          There is a complex of electronic warfare measures, which sets one of its tasks - the fight against the enemy's WTO. And for this there is enough special equipment
          1. voyaka uh
            voyaka uh 26 December 2016 12: 03
            +1
            When will be, then we'll see. No protection from SPIKE hitting yet
            from above into the hatch of the tower no.
            1. Lopatov
              Lopatov 26 December 2016 12: 06
              +1
              Quote: voyaka uh
              When will be, then we'll see.

              Has already. "Infauna". Interfering with optics.
              1. voyaka uh
                voyaka uh 26 December 2016 12: 31
                +2
                "Already there." Infauna. Interfering with optics "///

                Here, put it first on your (or export) serial tanks,
                then we'll see. Russia has many developments (maybe excellent ones),
                which remain prototypes or laboratory samples.
                SPIKE is a serial product. Supplied for both the IDF and is exported.
                1. svp67
                  svp67 26 December 2016 12: 40
                  +1
                  Quote: voyaka uh
                  Here, put it first on your (or export) serial tanks,
                  then we'll see

                  Already...
                  Only this EW complex alone is capable of covering several dozen tanks ...
                  1. Vadim237
                    Vadim237 26 December 2016 13: 42
                    0
                    "Only this EW complex alone is able to cover" - Yes, it is indeed capable - only in words, there was no practical experience to test, since we do not have third-generation ATGMs - all these EW systems are the last thing to hope for.
                    1. svp67
                      svp67 26 December 2016 13: 49
                      0
                      Quote: Vadim237
                      since we do not have third-generation ATGM systems

                      Who told you that? The Hermes ATGM system has long been developed and, most importantly, tested, but, alas, has not yet been adopted for service. So there is something to check ...
                      1. Vadim237
                        Vadim237 26 December 2016 16: 31
                        0
                        ATGM "Hermes" is the second + generation, but not the third - all the more not portable.
            2. ZKB
              ZKB 26 December 2016 23: 42
              0
              Stop. how none? there are means of detecting atm, there are means of destruction. Naturally, the armada armada will cover the infantry, aviation and the military, it’s stupid to climb, there is no need for spikes, a good volley of missile defense systems and sneakers, but if you work normally, a tank is real strength and protection. by the way, the tower is uninhabited on the armature ...
        2. Lopatov
          Lopatov 26 December 2016 12: 03
          0
          Quote: voyaka uh
          He was just born, and you are in the endangered

          It happens often. When they create weapons, relying not on the enemy in the future, but on the enemy in the past.


          Quote: voyaka uh
          Nobody has KAZs yet.

          There is now in the "news" in the top there is a message that Turkey plans to accelerate the development of its KAZ. And they are by no means among the leaders in the production of weapons.

          Quote: voyaka uh
          As well as optoelectronic suppression.

          Hello, we arrived ...
          1. voyaka uh
            voyaka uh 26 December 2016 12: 32
            0
            Someone "plans" - not very interesting. Interesting serial equipment
            on serial tanks.
            1. Lopatov
              Lopatov 26 December 2016 13: 01
              0
              Quote: voyaka uh
              Someone "plans" - not very interesting.

              But it is very serious.
              To hope that the war in Syria and Iraq, characterized by the massive use of ATGMs, will not change anything is at least naive.
            2. An60
              An60 26 December 2016 15: 03
              0
              So you will check it on the APU.
      3. Vadim237
        Vadim237 26 December 2016 13: 34
        0
        Here are just these optoelectronic suppression systems and KAZs about which everyone is babbling here - in our army, for example, "a cat cried" for our infantry fighting vehicles, even dynamic protection is not purchased, and you say "Suppression systems".
        1. Lopatov
          Lopatov 26 December 2016 13: 47
          0
          Quote: Vadim237
          Here are just these optoelectronic suppression systems and KAZs about which everyone is babbling here - in our army, for example, "the cat cried"

          While the "cat cried". Don't forget to insert this word, "bye."

          I didn't say Spikes are useless. I said they are an endangered species. And their effectiveness will fall every year.
          Already now, for example, it is completely useless to launch them on modern German infantry fighting vehicles. "Thanks" to the installation on them of a new KOEP with UV sensors for detecting missile "torches".
          1. voyaka uh
            voyaka uh 26 December 2016 15: 40
            +1
            "it is completely useless to launch them on modern German infantry fighting vehicles" ////

            It’s completely useless. Missiles, including ATGMs that are equipped
            own GOS with an IR video camera, it’s easy to add additives.
            And the scanning video camera in the rocket head - what kind of electronic warfare will save here.? the video just sees the tank, verifies what it sees with a photo in the memory of her computer - "aha, tower, hatch -
            there and orders me to kick ... wassat "
            1. Vadim237
              Vadim237 26 December 2016 16: 37
              0
              "What kind of electronic warfare will save here" - Not any, unless in the future they will create a KAZ with a laser installation - a burning and incapacitating homing head of anti-tank missiles, but again, only very rich armies of the world can afford it.
              1. Lopatov
                Lopatov 26 December 2016 16: 55
                0
                Quote: Vadim237
                KAZ with a laser system - burning and incapacitating homing anti-tank missiles

                This is not "KAZ", this is KOEP. And it was created long ago. The Israelis are aware that they even have it installed on civilian aircraft.
            2. Lopatov
              Lopatov 26 December 2016 16: 53
              +1
              Quote: voyaka uh
              It’s completely useless. Missiles, including ATGMs that are equipped
              own GOS with an IR video camera, it’s easy to add additives.

              "Additives" will allow you to see through an aerosol cloud that is impenetrable in all ranges?

              Quote: voyaka uh
              And the scanning video camera in the rocket head - what kind of electronic warfare will save here.? the video just sees the tank, verifies what it sees with a photo in the memory of her computer - "aha, tower, hatch -
              there PO and orders me to hit ... "

              Roughly: you look through binoculars, they shine with a laser pointer at you. Tell us what you intend to see ... If you don’t burn the retina ...
              1. Operator
                Operator 26 December 2016 16: 58
                0
                A warrior from the "chosen by God", and they sacredly believe that their ATGMs in flight are not visible from the word at all laughing
              2. voyaka uh
                voyaka uh 26 December 2016 18: 06
                +1
                All that you have listed - yes - can save the tank from ATGM. But nothing
                of this is not on production machines. When it starts to appear, then
                and will think what to do next.
                1. Lopatov
                  Lopatov 26 December 2016 18: 37
                  0
                  Quote: voyaka uh
                  But nothing
                  of this is not on production machines.

                  Do you consider the beginning of deliveries to the troops of the Puma infantry fighting vehicle a fake? After the photo session, dismantled and melted down?
                  1. Vadim237
                    Vadim237 27 December 2016 00: 56
                    0
                    On these, that is, but on our horseradish - bald, instead of KAZs and KOEP.
  5. McLuha-MacLeod
    McLuha-MacLeod 26 December 2016 10: 55
    0
    No need to convince them of anything. And then we’ll teach you something right
  6. Lumumba
    Lumumba 26 December 2016 10: 57
    +1
    That's good. Let them rivet more. More dough will leave the treasury. bully


    They FSUs, they print money.
    1. Genry
      Genry 26 December 2016 11: 54
      0
      You can print while there are suckers who will buy this paper-money for their wealth. You, if you print, vparit ...?
      Suckers, they already began to grow wiser.
  7. _my opinion
    _my opinion 26 December 2016 11: 06
    +1
    It is stated that the new shells are capable of penetrating armor up to 100 mm.

    ... well, the armor of ancient tanks will not break through, and nothing about Armata can be said ....
    Well, as an option for loading (earning profits) of Ajax producers, this is the case, first they will produce / buy in bulk Ajax, talk about their inefficiency, load another producer with orders ... and Ajax will be pushed to someone at an exorbitant price ...
  8. Lumumba
    Lumumba 26 December 2016 11: 11
    +2
    The British will form the "shock brigade"


    Yes you are. We are it. We are the brigade!
  9. Bronevick
    Bronevick 26 December 2016 11: 16
    +3
    They are going to punch 40 millimeters?
  10. doubovitski
    doubovitski 26 December 2016 11: 29
    +1
    Quote: Holoy
    what should I say then? If the tanks in Grozny and Syria were almost all knocked out ...

    Do you suggest knocking out English tanks on the streets of Russian cities?
    Explain.
  11. valerian
    valerian 26 December 2016 11: 32
    0
    stupid people, we don’t need x, but attack, who will control them? Radioactive ash?
  12. Taygerus
    Taygerus 26 December 2016 11: 34
    +1
    insanity flourishes, under BMP, under armored personnel carrier with dead weapons, to which Almaty and Kurgan people they gathered, created tin crews, let them sit there on their island and keep quiet
  13. The comment was deleted.
  14. doubovitski
    doubovitski 26 December 2016 11: 36
    +1
    I wonder how this lightweight 100 mm projectile saves enough energy to destroy 40mm of armor. He breaks it from 20 meters, probably? And a rubberized goose, allowing you to sneak inaudibly at such a distance confirms this tactic. The question is, why the hell should I let it go so close if with the same 125 mm shells this can can be opened at a distance of 2 km?
    1. voyaka uh
      voyaka uh 26 December 2016 12: 40
      0
      This is an infantry support vehicle. 40 mm armor-piercing - against
      BMP and armored personnel carrier of the enemy. Against MBT, they have Challengers with approximately
      equal opportunities with Russian tanks ..
      1. Lopatov
        Lopatov 26 December 2016 13: 49
        0
        Quote: voyaka uh
        Against MBT, they have Challengers with approximately
        equal opportunities with Russian tanks ..

        The ones that they decided to significantly reduce?
        1. voyaka uh
          voyaka uh 26 December 2016 18: 10
          0
          Those, they have no others.
          But for these separate expeditionary battalions and those
          a few dozen is enough. This is a show of strength.
          in defense, not armor-fist. So as not to give up without a fight.
          1. Lopatov
            Lopatov 26 December 2016 18: 42
            0
            Quote: voyaka uh
            But for these separate expeditionary battalions and those
            a few dozen is enough.

            Drive thousands of Russian tanks? Do you think a few dozen is enough?
            By the way, "Challenger-2" is a kind of unique. At the moment, there are no MBTs in the world that would knock out with a direct hit on the forehead from an RPG.
            1. voyaka uh
              voyaka uh 26 December 2016 19: 00
              0
              "Drive thousands of Russian tanks? Do you think a few dozen is enough?" ///

              You are inattentively reading my posts. I wrote:
              "This is a show of strength in defense, not an armored fist. So as not to surrender without a fight."

              "In the world at the moment there are no more MBTs that would knock out direct
              hitting the forehead from an RPG "///

              Under the lower frontal plate. They were shooting from below.
              In Grozny, too, Russian tanks were knocked out of basements.
              I don’t think Challenger is a particularly good tank because of the obsolete guns and the LMS,
              but it is as armored as the rest.
              1. Lopatov
                Lopatov 26 December 2016 20: 13
                0
                Quote: voyaka uh
                In Grozny, too, Russian tanks were knocked out of basements.

                Someone has powerfully misled you ... Only disposable grenade launchers can fire Soviet grenade launchers from Soviet cellars.
              2. KaPToC
                KaPToC 26 December 2016 21: 11
                0
                Quote: voyaka uh
                "This is a show of strength in defense, not an armored fist. So as not to surrender without a fight."

                Tanks cut off the enemy from supplies and the enemy surrenders without a fight, and sending tanks to prepared enemy positions is not a good mind.
    2. Vadim237
      Vadim237 26 December 2016 13: 45
      0
      The United States has 30mm cumulative ammunition that can penetrate 200 to 300 millimeters of armor.
  15. Mountain shooter
    Mountain shooter 26 December 2016 11: 37
    +1
    Telescopic shells worked out with us. We decided that while this system is very crude and unreliable, we left it at the R&D stage. And they decided the whole army with such weapons - either to arm, or to disarm wassat
    The shells are there - they don't fit any guns at all. And God bless them.
    1. voyaka uh
      voyaka uh 26 December 2016 12: 46
      0
      This is how they look. The Americans are already using similar small-caliber "arrows"
    2. voyaka uh
      voyaka uh 26 December 2016 12: 52
      +1
      These are 40 mm ordered by the British.
      Of course, they are much more expensive to produce than conventional ones.

  16. kolkulon
    kolkulon 26 December 2016 11: 48
    +1
    Put a muffler, a projectile lock for powder gases and voila-caterpillar "vintorez"
  17. voyaka uh
    voyaka uh 26 December 2016 11: 52
    +1
    "The armament is weak - like the BMP, but there is no landing. Besides, any modern BMP has
    anti-tank missiles. At the same time, the weight and dimensions of the "Ajax" are the same as those of the MBT of the late 70s. "" ///

    No landing is a plus. There is nothing to destroy the landing. No anti-tank missiles - minutes.
    Weight and dimensions are large - which means that the armor is serious - plus.
    Against MBT, such machines are suicidal, only as a last resort, fired
    ATGM ambush and run.
    But to support the infantry, like a support tank, it is normal.
    1. KaPToC
      KaPToC 26 December 2016 17: 28
      0
      Security is inversely proportional to the size of the machine.
  18. Zheka40
    Zheka40 26 December 2016 12: 00
    +1
    Clowns are bespontovye.
  19. Agent_017
    Agent_017 26 December 2016 12: 05
    0
  20. Slon_on
    Slon_on 26 December 2016 12: 09
    +1
    Well, the Englishwoman can't help shit, from the word - in any way. And always with perversions - either "Stirling" will come up with a magazine on the side, then a machine gun with a magazine on top (BESA - it seems), then an automatic rifle L85 from which you cannot shoot in bursts. And here it is completely incomprehensible that, weighing the size of a tank, shoots some kind of muddy shells.
    1. The stranger
      The stranger 27 December 2016 21: 11
      0
      Want a question for the slaughter? I won’t decide which year I’m fighting. What is scarier with them: cars, airplanes, or women?
      1. Slon_on
        Slon_on 28 December 2016 09: 22
        +1
        I answer the question. Most terrible of all they have a genetic tendency to perversion, a tradition like that.
        1. The stranger
          The stranger 28 December 2016 16: 43
          0
          Hmm. It's hard to argue here ...)
  21. Woldemar
    Woldemar 26 December 2016 12: 16
    +2
    “New military units will be a mobile reserve that can be transferred in a matter of hours to any region of Europe, from Romania to the Baltic states”
    How they assemble a brigade of 100 units. equipment, weighing under 40 tons each, to transfer in a few hours to any region of Europe? It is doubtful.
    1. Vadim237
      Vadim237 26 December 2016 13: 46
      0
      And how many transport planes do they have?
  22. Babermetis
    Babermetis 26 December 2016 12: 30
    +2
    http://www.sarna.net/wiki/File:Ajax.gif

    They probably talk about this ... bully with lasers fellow
  23. Berkut24
    Berkut24 26 December 2016 12: 31
    +1
    Why do island natives need armored vehicles ?!
  24. mamuka
    mamuka 26 December 2016 12: 43
    +1
    IMHO: here is the main thing in the article - "in order to stop a possible invasion of Russian troops, they explained in the British department." If this is the official position of the department, when they speak directly about the Russian invasion, then everything is quite serious. masks dropped? maybe it's time for ours to stop talking "our western partners." and take action without looking back
  25. Operator
    Operator 26 December 2016 12: 54
    +1
    Ajax ATGM vs. KAZ Almaty - a dead issue.

    Ajax is a purely concrete budget pillar (there is no Trump in Britain yet).
    1. Lopatov
      Lopatov 26 December 2016 13: 52
      0
      Quote: Operator
      Ajax is a purely concrete budget pillar (there is no Trump in Britain yet).

      I wonder what the Ajax critics have to say about the BMPT? eight)))))))))))))
      The same Hlopotov with two hands for. It is strange why, in his opinion, a 40-mm gun is not enough for the British, but for Russia a 30-mm cannon is quite enough?
      1. Operator
        Operator 26 December 2016 14: 03
        0
        BMPT is a means against anti-tank systems, and not against tanks. Therefore, for the BMPT, the 30-mm gun is quite suitable.

        Another thing is that KAZ is a much cheaper and more effective means against anti-tank systems - but Khlopotov and the developers of BMPT cannot understand this.
        1. Lopatov
          Lopatov 26 December 2016 14: 14
          0
          Quote: Operator
          BMPT is a means against anti-tank systems, and not against tanks. Therefore, for the BMPT, the 30-mm gun is quite suitable.

          Isn't the range too small for this, to fight the ATGM? Here, rather, tank guided projectiles are needed from a thermobaric warhead, because at the ranges of ATGM use, a conventional HE tank shell is not accurate enough ... 8)))

          Quote: Operator
          Another thing is that KAZ is a much cheaper and more effective means against anti-tank systems - but Khlopotov and the developers of BMPT cannot understand this.

          The most effective method of dealing with ATGMs is to kill the ATGM or prevent him from crawling out of cover to launch. And here out of competition is the barrel artillery, pounding on the squares.
          1. Operator
            Operator 26 December 2016 15: 56
            0
            I agree with you - the BMPT with the 30-mm gun does not channel against the anti-tank systems, the maximum against RPGs.

            Own KAZ for a tank is cheap and cheerful compared to giving a tank self-propelled artillery and firing at squares.
            1. Vadim237
              Vadim237 26 December 2016 16: 40
              0
              "Own KAZ for a tank is cheap and cheerful" - So why doesn't our Defense Ministry buy them?
            2. Lopatov
              Lopatov 26 December 2016 18: 51
              0
              Without artillery, all the same, nothing. At least in order to fight someone else's artillery. One passage through the line of barrage, and all these "beauties" from the armor of the tank: KAZ, KOEP, a cool combat module, dynamic protection, as if with a tongue
  26. maxim1987
    maxim1987 26 December 2016 12: 56
    +1
    you better form detachments so that the Baltic states. pshekov and ukrov drive into battle. Db.
  27. Siny
    Siny 26 December 2016 14: 25
    0
    Russia is not an aggressor, it’s funny when they are going to repel a non-existent threat!
  28. gloomy fox
    gloomy fox 26 December 2016 14: 37
    +1
    I have one sensation when they yell about the threat from the Russian Federation, they simply have nothing else to scare their citizens with, as well as to cut the loot. . Well, every step you take will still think of how to answer. Ho - Ho-Ho Yankee. angry
  29. Leonid Har
    Leonid Har 26 December 2016 14: 49
    0
    Will go against the Terminator and who will win?
    1. Vadim237
      Vadim237 27 December 2016 01: 09
      0
      They are armed with Brimstone 2 missiles with a two-channel homing head - a three-mode radar, plus a laser one, with a launch range of 20 kilometers, neither Armata nor the Terminator nor any other equipment are against it, there will be no chances.
  30. mojohed2012
    mojohed2012 26 December 2016 14: 58
    0
    Ajax is a relative of the BMP-2. BMP armor protection, and the mass is like a tank. Armament - for battles with the Papuans in the desert, so that you can see the javelin spear for two kilometers.
    This is shelter. Just trash. The same line of equipment as the unsuccessful APC Saxon.
  31. vmo
    vmo 26 December 2016 16: 35
    0
    How tired are they to defend the poor, with ....... ki ??
  32. svp67
    svp67 26 December 2016 18: 22
    0
    Vadim237,
    Quote: Vadim237
    ATGM "Hermes" is the second + generation, but not the third - all the more not portable.

    Not portable - YES, but certainly not second generation. Since it uses the principle of "fire and forget"
  33. Sergey F
    Sergey F 26 December 2016 20: 14
    0
    And yet I don't understand something!
    What kind of aggression are we talking about? And second, do the British really hope to resist Russian technology if it comes to the islands?
  34. marlin1203
    marlin1203 26 December 2016 21: 17
    0
    Two reconnaissance regiments in the brigade ?! Is that "peep and slip away"). Yeah ... quite the Brits relaxed on their islands))
  35. Aandrewsir
    Aandrewsir 26 December 2016 23: 05
    0
    Well, the "piece of iron" is clear. What human resources will the British use? Persistent and vicious homosexuals? Lesbian beauties? Asians? Negroes? ... Maybe Indians or Gurkos? I doubt they will agree!
  36. Elevator in the building
    Elevator in the building 27 December 2016 09: 29
    0
    Quote: Holoy
    Cheaper than a tank, and the Armata for sure ...

    Tanks are already Anachranism ... in Africa, only use ...

    If the Rocket hits from above ... then nothing will save the tank ...


    You are not the reincarnation of Khrushchev ..? Following your "logic", it is time for the automaton to lie down on the shelves of the museum next to the sling, because "Satan" rules the ball ..
  37. doubovitski
    doubovitski 27 December 2016 11: 53
    +1
    Quote: voyaka uh
    "The armament is weak - like the BMP, but there is no landing. Besides, any modern BMP has
    anti-tank missiles. At the same time, the weight and dimensions of the "Ajax" are the same as those of the MBT of the late 70s. "" ///

    No landing is a plus. There is nothing to destroy the landing. No anti-tank missiles - minutes.
    Weight and dimensions are large - which means that the armor is serious - plus.
    Against MBT, such machines are suicidal, only as a last resort, fired
    ATGM ambush and run.
    But to support the infantry, like a support tank, it is normal.

    Wouldn't it be better to destroy enemy infantry with land mines and high explosives with such a high-speed rifle? And destroy armored vehicles with the same RPGs? ... First pack the enemy into cover with this shredder?
  38. pafegosoff
    pafegosoff 27 December 2016 15: 49
    +1
    And let them spend money on all kinds of armored vehicles. This is a very useful thing on the island. Or do they think that in the event of a nuclear war, the Russians will drop troops with armored vehicles instead of nuclear warheads on the island? Should the Rolls-Royce factories be seized or the banks of the City to wool?
    Something somehow ... It looks like laundering the budget (I remembered an old American comedy how such a machine was sold ...)
  39. Gvfrog
    Gvfrog 27 December 2016 20: 11
    0
    I don't understand what the dispute is about? The mattress makers have the F-35, and the insolent hotsa also came up with "Ajax"!