Military Review

BMPT "Terminator" demonstrated its best qualities in Syria

103
The heavy combat vehicle "Terminator" has become one of the most talked about samples of the Russian weapons - information noise rose after she was sent to Syria, writes Messenger of Mordovia.


BMPT "Terminator" demonstrated its best qualities in Syria


According to the information that was voiced on the sidelines of the Army-2017 forum, in its first hot spot, BMPT demonstrated all its best qualities. This combat experience largely contributed to the procurement of machines for the Armed Forces.

“The car was remembered by everyone who saw dynamic demonstrations of Russian military equipment as part of Army 2017 at the Alabino range. By the way, the forum also sounded that the Terminators can take part in one of the nearest parades on Red Square, ”the author of the material, Lev Romanov, writes.



The terminator’s combat experience was also analyzed by Kazakhstan partners. According to the author, company companies are being created in the army of Kazakhstan tank tactical groups. They include the upgraded T-72B and BMP-2, which received additional trellis screens. They will be supported by “terminators” purchased in Russia.



According to the Kazakh military, "BMPT can replace 2-2,5 infantry combat vehicles or 3-4 BTRs by its combat potential, and surpasses two motorized rifle platoons in firepower."

In addition, the TOS-1A “Solntsek” flamethrower systems, which also showed themselves perfectly in Iraq and Syria, will be assigned to tank units.
Photos used:
Alexey Khlopotov
103 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. A Farewell to Arms
    A Farewell to Arms 4 September 2017 11: 06
    +6
    Well ... Combined business with pleasure ... good
    1. oleg-gr
      oleg-gr 4 September 2017 11: 10
      +9
      Showed the possibility of arming the Terminator in practice. After such an application will be what to tell potential buyers.
      1. Starover_Z
        Starover_Z 4 September 2017 11: 21
        +10
        Quote: oleg-gr
        Showed the possibility of arming the Terminator in practice. After such an application will be what to tell potential buyers.

        Only show! I don’t think they will be able to tell about their action, which fell under the fire of the barmalei!
        1. Shurik70
          Shurik70 4 September 2017 13: 30
          +3
          Military equipment should be characterized not only by attack, but also by defense.
          No matter how they take care, the terminator will fall into a street battle - they will also shoot at him.
          Why is there so much advertising about the “Bradley” about the convenience of passengers, the number of weapons, and not a word about the armor - there are simply no survivors after hitting even the RPG-7.
          Here, I hope there will be something to tell
        2. DimerVladimer
          DimerVladimer 4 September 2017 13: 52
          +4
          BMPT has firepower, smoke from fortified points? 30 mm shells are effective in poorly protected shelters, for example, houses with walls of one brick. It will do for Syria, where the houses are prefabricated-monolithic type with walls of gas blocks / cinder blocks.
          The power of 30 mm guns - not always enough - 57 mm would make it possible to solve a much wider range of tasks and a longer direct shot range. In addition, shells with a programmable remote detonation are much more effective at defeating infantry hidden in trenches than 30-40 mm grenade launchers.

          In fact, BMPTs are defenseless against anti-tank systems firing from a distance beyond the effective fire of 30 mm cannons.
          1. IS-80_RVGK2
            IS-80_RVGK2 4 September 2017 14: 36
            +1
            Quote: DimerVladimer
            57 mm would make it possible to solve a much wider range of tasks and a greater range of direct shot

            It is not necessary for nothing, you need a 45 mm autocannon.
            Quote: DimerVladimer
            In addition, shells with a programmable remote detonation are much more effective at defeating infantry sheltered in trenches than 30-40 mm grenade launchers.

            A grenade launcher is cheaper, this one time, remote detonation for auto-guns is not always more effective than two. From this point of view, remote detonation can be done in a 40-45 mm grenade, and there it will be much more effective. Due to less dispersion in range and more explosive charge and more fragments.
            Quote: DimerVladimer
            In fact, BMPTs are defenseless against anti-tank systems firing from a distance beyond the effective fire of 30 mm cannons.

            To begin with, let this ATGM be able to at least normally aim at the BMPT, then shoot, and then hit, then break through, then disable BMPT with this penetration.
            1. DimerVladimer
              DimerVladimer 4 September 2017 15: 23
              +2
              Quote: IS-80_RVGK2
              It is not necessary for nothing, you need a 45 mm autocannon.


              Ammunition is being made, and not vice versa.
              There is a supply of shells from the S-60 and a technology for the production of 57 mm of ammunition - but I have not heard about 45 mm in the Second World War.
              Quote: IS-80_RVGK2
              A grenade launcher is cheaper, this one time, remote detonation for auto-guns is not always more effective than two. From this point of view, remote detonation can be done in a 40-45 mm grenade, and there it will be much more effective.


              You do not understand the difference between the mounted fire of a grenade launcher and the flat path of the gun? The power of ammunition (how will 40 mm pick walls of fortified objects? Even if it doesn’t break a wall into 1 brick), while 57 mm will make holes in 200 mm reinforced concrete walls, which has already been tested in Syria with S-60 and ZSU-57-2.


              Quote: IS-80_RVGK2

              To begin with, let this ATGM be able to at least normally aim at the BMPT, then shoot, and then hit, then break through, then disable BMPT with this penetration.


              What is the actual problem for Javelin? It is induced when attacking the roof - with a high degree of probability it affects armored vehicles.
              1. DimerVladimer
                DimerVladimer 4 September 2017 16: 12
                +1
                Quote: DimerVladimer
                but about 45 mm in the Second World War I have not heard.


                Although not, the marine version is a 45-mm fragmentation tracer shell, cartridge 45x386SR for the SM-20-ZIF shipboard installation

                But I don’t see the point of pulling the cat for dignity - when there is a proven technology for the production of 57 × 348 mm SR blast shells for which you need to develop a programmable fuse and a gun programmer.

                For firing ZSU-57-2 shots were used UOR-281U and UOR-281 (with fragmentation tracer grenade, 2,8 kg), as well as UBR-281U, UBR-281 and UBR-281SP (with armor-piercing tracer shell, 2,8 12 kg). Ballistic firing range reached 12 km, but the slant range of fragmentation shells with self-destructive (response time 16-6,5 s) was 7-60 km. Armor-piercing shells, depending on the angle of meeting with the target and the distance to it, provided penetration of armor 110-XNUMX mm thick.
                http://www.arms-expo.ru/news/archive/zenitnyy-tan
                k-ne-legendarnyy-no-nezabyvaemyy-04-05-2012-21-10
                -00 /? Sphrase_id = 10396275
              2. IS-80_RVGK2
                IS-80_RVGK2 4 September 2017 17: 07
                +2
                Quote: DimerVladimer
                There is a supply of shells from the S-60 and a technology for the production of 57 mm of ammunition - but I have not heard about 45 mm in the Second World War.

                We still have kernels, maybe something else will be done for them? Well, hear, smoke the Internet on the topic of CTAS and our developments of the 45 mm autocannon and you will be happy. In the case of CTAS, of course, 40 mm, but 45 mm is dearer to us.
                Quote: DimerVladimer
                By the power of ammunition (how will 40 mm pick walls of fortified objects? Even in 1 brick it does not break through a wall)

                Do you have enough BK to pick these walls? Well, pick them, and then? Are you going to attack with a checker and shouting cheers? BC is over.
                100 mm / 60 ° / 1500 m are you missing for 40? And at 45 mm guns penetration more. 100 mm of homogeneous armor steel at an angle of 60 do you have it less than a brick?
                Quote: DimerVladimer
                while 57 mm will be wonderful to perforate the walls of 200 mm reinforced concrete - which has already been tested in Syria on the S-60 and ZSU-57-2.

                Fishlessness and cancer. And normal people with normal artillery do not engage in such garbage.
                Quote: DimerVladimer
                What is the actual problem for Javelin? It is induced when attacking the roof - with a high degree of probability it affects armored vehicles.

                Or, if KAZ and / or DZ is installed, it does not strike. And the movement is even worse and the range there is something of the order of 2-2,5 km, and the tank gun has a shot, still oh, further, about 5 km.
            2. DimerVladimer
              DimerVladimer 4 September 2017 15: 40
              0

              Quote: IS-80_RVGK2
              Due to less dispersion in range and more explosive charge and more fragments


              Is it a grenade launcher? Which conducts mounted fire? Compared to a cannon (flat trajectory) - do you even know anything about a weapon?

              The dispersion ellipse for the howitzer and the AGS grenade launcher obeys the same laws of ballistics.
              However, due to air blasting - the dispersion of fragments from a projectile with remote blasting - is more optimal for hitting dead infantry or in trenches.
              1. IS-80_RVGK2
                IS-80_RVGK2 4 September 2017 17: 10
                +1
                Quote: DimerVladimer
                Is it a grenade launcher? Which conducts mounted fire? Compared to a cannon (flat trajectory) - do you even know anything about a weapon?

                I know something that you don’t know.
                Quote: DimerVladimer
                The dispersion ellipse for the howitzer and the AGS grenade launcher obeys the same laws of ballistics

                Range dispersion in AGS is less.
                Quote: DimerVladimer
                However, due to air blasting - the dispersion of fragments from a projectile with remote blasting - is more optimal for hitting dead infantry or in trenches.

                What prevents the use of remote detonation in grenades AGS?
                1. DimerVladimer
                  DimerVladimer 6 September 2017 12: 14
                  0
                  Quote: IS-80_RVGK2
                  Range dispersion in AGS is less.


                  What do you compare the dispersion of AGS-17/30/40 at a range of 1700-2500 m?
                  The howitzer at a distance of 1700 m, will give less dispersion ellipse - here the mass of the shell affects.
                  With a range of aimed fire of 1700-2500 m and a hinged trajectory - dispersion is not higher.
                  A direct-shot gun, will give more dispersion in range for a conventional HE projectile, the laws of ballistics are one. But the exceptional accuracy and range of damage is twice as much as the AGS-40.
                  And taking into account the installation of a programmable detonator on blasting shells - it will be very efficient to “clean” the trenches and fortified structures, compared to a 30-40 mm programmable shell, and certainly more versatile than the AGS-40, which is effective only on un fortified objects.

                  40 mm 7P39 grenade for AGS-40 has a mass of 0,4 kg, 57 mm of HE - 2,8 kg - without even knowing the mass of explosives, it is obvious that the high-explosive fragmentation of the 57-mm HE shell is much higher.

                  But AGS-40 on Terminator 3 is needed - this is the best protection against unprotected infantry - its very presence on the BMPT will act sobering.
            3. DimerVladimer
              DimerVladimer 4 September 2017 15: 54
              +3
              Quote: IS-80_RVGK2
              A grenade launcher is cheaper, this one time, remote detonation for auto-guns is not always more effective than two.



              The blasting shells of 57 mm (and they were originally designed for ZSU-57-2 and S-60) will need to be supplemented with fuses programmed in the chamber associated with the rangefinder.

              To create a programmable projectile with remote detonation in the caliber of 57 mm using the operating time of shells 57 × 348 mm SR (for S-60 or ZSU-57-2) is much more logical.
              What is the defense industry doing now
              http://army-news.ru/2015/07/perspektivnaya-zenitn
              aya-samoxodka-s-57-mm-orudiem /
              1. IS-80_RVGK2
                IS-80_RVGK2 4 September 2017 17: 27
                +2
                Quote: DimerVladimer
                The blasting shells of 57 mm (and they were originally designed for ZSU-57-2 and S-60) will need to be supplemented with fuses programmed in the chamber associated with the rangefinder.

                To create a programmable projectile with remote detonation in the caliber of 57 mm using the operating time of shells 57 × 348 mm SR (for S-60 or ZSU-57-2) is much more logical.

                And why did you show me these pictures? How should they surprise me? Well, soldiers, well, in the trenches. Do you have anything other than fantasy for that? Fighting situations are different. Including such when you need your flat gun horseradish assistant even with remote detonation. Nichrome is not more logical. These are yours and individual figures from the military-industrial complex of the Wishlist, not really doing anything, exploiting the best practices of the times of the USSR to grab an order and cut money.
                Quote: DimerVladimer
                What is the defense industry doing now

                In this case, he is engaged in crap, as in many other things.
                1. DimerVladimer
                  DimerVladimer 6 September 2017 11: 38
                  0
                  Quote: IS-80_RVGK2
                  Fighting situations are different.


                  Well, do not cut off the "sore leg" for a little bit 30mm-40mm-45mm-57mm
                  To obtain a qualitative increase in the characteristics, it is very competent to use an existing tool, but which has received new guidance means, that is, from 30mm immediately 57mm.
                  Although 57mm ammunition is not without flaws - according to the results of the Second World War, why the ZiS-2 caliber 57 mm did not become the main gun, having outstanding armor-piercing characteristics? Why did the 76 mm divisional ZiS-3 become a mass gun?
                  The well-known reason is the insufficient high-explosive action of 57 mm grenades and a large number of 76 mm grenades at the Red Army's warehouses, the established mass production of 76 mm cartridges, determined the mass production of guns for this munition.
            4. DimerVladimer
              DimerVladimer 4 September 2017 16: 25
              +3

              in addition, combat modules have already been developed
              TsNII "Petrel" - AU A-220M and AU-220M
              https://topwar.ru/10178-cnii-burevestnik-au-a-220
              mi-au-220m.html
        3. Leeds
          Leeds 4 September 2017 17: 55
          +1
          And did someone see at least one video of military use? .... I don’t think that Twitter lovers, Syrians, missed the opportunity to shoot it near Akerbat or on the way to the DEZ.
      2. NEXUS
        NEXUS 4 September 2017 16: 32
        +6
        Quote: oleg-gr
        Showed the possibility of arming the Terminator in practice. After such an application will be what to tell potential buyers.

        And if the Terminators go together with Solntsepek ... what kind of hell will these two units be able to create on the battlefield then ...
    2. Thrall
      Thrall 4 September 2017 11: 11
      +6
      BMPT "Terminator" demonstrated its best qualities in Syria

      I think that far from all the qualities. So how to apply it there completely on the profile is hardly seemed possible.
    3. x.andvlad
      x.andvlad 4 September 2017 11: 14
      +7
      Our military leaders thought for a long time. Well, even so.
      But the name warps.
      1. Topotun
        Topotun 4 September 2017 11: 45
        +5
        Yeah, they would call it "Dobrynya" or something. Or again from the "flower" series ....
        1. x.andvlad
          x.andvlad 4 September 2017 12: 15
          +7
          Yes, at least "Vanka-vstanka"! If only in Russian. Already in meager English to take the names of Russian weapons - this is not right.
        2. armourer
          armourer 4 September 2017 20: 06
          0
          Waflepazik)))
    4. vkl.47
      vkl.47 4 September 2017 11: 49
      +13
      The module itself is rather weak. It is necessary not 4 but 8 ATGMs. Make a 57mm cannon with a coaxial 30 and an extra cord machine gun. It's not like he doesn’t pull on the terminator. Old Werther and then stronger))
      1. enot73
        enot73 4 September 2017 12: 10
        +1
        Quote: vkl.47
        The module itself is rather weak. It is necessary not 4 but 8 ATGMs. Make a 57mm cannon with a paired 30 and
        In addition, IMHO combat module is the weakest BMPT security.
      2. Captain Pushkin
        Captain Pushkin 4 September 2017 12: 31
        +4
        Quote: vkl.47
        Make a 57mm cannon with a coaxial 30 and an extra cord machine gun.

        On some branch already wrote about this same. S-60 in all forms in Syria is a very respected instrument of persuasion.
        This is when they go to the barmaleys with a kind word, it does not always convince them, and when with a kind word and with S-60, they become much more accommodating.
      3. Dead duck
        Dead duck 4 September 2017 12: 32
        +8
        Quote: vkl.47
        Old Werther and then stronger))

        Rodriguez is stronger, bends anyone in an arc laughing
      4. IS-80_RVGK2
        IS-80_RVGK2 4 September 2017 14: 39
        +4
        Quote: vkl.47
        It is necessary not 4 but 8 ATGMs.

        Yeah, and that in one gulp at the enemy like Katyusha, she's BM-13.
        Quote: vkl.47
        Make a 57mm cannon with a coaxial 30 and an extra cord machine gun. It's not like he doesn’t pull on the terminator. Old Werther and then stronger))

        What tasks are you going to solve with such a complex of weapons? Or just put together everything you like and hear about?
        1. aws4
          aws4 5 September 2017 05: 48
          +2
          Well, why is he right .. I would have additionally put two small turrets with aviation 6 machine guns and on the trailer behind you can place a mortar and landing pad for a mini helicopter that would take off from dropping leaflets of agitation over the enemy laughing
    5. max702
      max702 7 September 2017 20: 11
      +2
      Ndaa ... And not a word about real databases ... Like, look at the ads and everything is cool there .. Today, every iron is equipped with a camera, and considering that at least the test sample should be crammed with them very well, and shooting from the side is mandatory. And what do we see? But nothing! Some words, and not from users, but from sellers ... Now, regarding the equipment of this device and disputes around it .. IMHO everything has already been invented for us, namely this option unless DUMB 7.62 \ AGS40mm is asked for a roof under the control of the commander .. Unless you throw the airborne AGS and a couple of crew members, or you can equip any crew member with the drives and cameras at least for the commander, even the driver’s mechanic .. Plus, there’s such a tower it is quite possible to put on any tank during repair or modernization .. It is only advisable to teach the crew how to understand because the 100mm has regular shells with programmable detonation, unlike other proposed options.
  2. andrewkor
    andrewkor 4 September 2017 11: 09
    +4
    Give the video !!!!!
    1. Thrall
      Thrall 4 September 2017 11: 29
      +4
      Quote: andrewkor
      Give the video !!!!!

      There are no technologies yet allowing to read the image from the retina of the women who were destroyed by the Terminator smile
      1. Dead duck
        Dead duck 4 September 2017 12: 34
        +7
        Quote: Thrall
        Quote: andrewkor
        Give the video !!!!!

        There are no technologies yet allowing to read the image from the retina of the women who were destroyed by the Terminator smile

        Do you offer retina-guided missiles? winked
    2. HEATHER
      HEATHER 4 September 2017 14: 17
      +5
      There is a small one.
  3. Petr1
    Petr1 4 September 2017 11: 15
    +5
    Cinema would be removed. But then only in words
    1. x.andvlad
      x.andvlad 4 September 2017 11: 23
      +2
      Unfortunately with the “kin” we have a little weak. While you need to send interns to Hollywood.
  4. gloomy fox
    gloomy fox 4 September 2017 11: 17
    +3
    We look forward to and hope for a video with the participation of this car in the battles. Well, or a story about how this car was used.
  5. Mountain shooter
    Mountain shooter 4 September 2017 11: 19
    +9
    Uncontested car. It is very successful in terms of use in such hostilities. "Terminator" a whole herd of jihadmobiles can interrupt, not really straining. wassat
    1. tchoni
      tchoni 4 September 2017 11: 53
      0
      It can be interrupted and BMP2, and BMD, and, even, in some cases, armored personnel carriers. Would there be a quick-firing gun or something like that)
      1. sivuch
        sivuch 4 September 2017 12: 48
        +5
        And the Shahidomobile based on the T-62, covered with carts, too?
        somehow not sure
        1. tchoni
          tchoni 4 September 2017 13: 30
          0
          On BMP, I’ll tell you a secret, the staff should be the same in the state) And the fact that they forget to put it is problems of the opachi))) And, even if you forgot the stock at home, do not despair, the available gun breaks the goose perfectly) )) If you didn’t manage with one gun and one gun, then 2 guns and 4 guns will most likely not save you.
    2. IS-80_RVGK2
      IS-80_RVGK2 4 September 2017 14: 44
      0
      Quote: Mountain Shooter
      Uncontested car. It is very successful in terms of use in such hostilities. "Terminator" a whole herd of jihadmobiles can interrupt, not really straining.

      In order to deal with wheelbarrows, it is necessary to introduce an expensive specialized machine into the OSh? Let’s then stamp cars with other formidable and impressive names, for example, to fight cavalry cooks, otherwise we’ll suddenly attack the horse with a ladle on the head, too, however.
  6. dvina71
    dvina71 4 September 2017 11: 20
    +8
    Chet Messenger of Mordovia burns .. TOS-s in tank units? EMNIP they were with chemists .., where actually they have a place.
    1. Zubr
      Zubr 4 September 2017 11: 58
      +5
      Well, yes, they have a place there. But for the tank, the infantryman with the “shaitan pipe” remained the worst. smile A thermobaric ammunition will not leave a chance for the survival of manpower. They worked out the sunshine along the front line, and then the tanks broke through, and the BMPT completed the job with grenades and cannons. And the tank will remain heavy armored targets. Everything seems to be logical.
      1. dvina71
        dvina71 4 September 2017 12: 20
        +3
        Quote: Zubr
        A thermobaric ammunition will not leave a chance for the survival of manpower.

        I do not argue. But TOS-2 is in the area of ​​ATGM .. imagine if a package of missiles in the guides immediately explode in your rear?
        There will be a range of 30-50 .. another conversation.
        1. Zubr
          Zubr 4 September 2017 12: 25
          +2
          Well, yes, TOS-2 has up to 6 km range. If this happens, it will be very hot ...
  7. korvin1976
    korvin1976 4 September 2017 11: 35
    +1
    And yet I still do not understand which of the machines they plan to deliver to the troops? The first or second terminator? Perhaps it is worth asking the question differently, what will be the number of crew in this car?
  8. gukoyan
    gukoyan 4 September 2017 11: 46
    +1
    It is strange that the Ministry of Defense has just noticed all the advantages of this handsome man; it was high time that the Terminator was put into service with our army.
    1. Topotun
      Topotun 4 September 2017 12: 17
      +3
      So maybe they started thinking about adopting weapons, only having run-in in Syria. You can not judge the combat capabilities of the machine purely theoretically ....
  9. Alexey-74
    Alexey-74 4 September 2017 11: 47
    0
    The machine is very efficient definitely, and it will certainly find its niche in the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation.
  10. Zubr
    Zubr 4 September 2017 11: 51
    +3
    Of course, the firepower incorporated in the BMPT, security and versatility in this machine is impressive. How many times I watched a video of how she mowed targets on the front line with grenade launchers and a machine gun. Four ATGM missiles, at least two tanks can be burned at a distance of over 5 km. See in urban battles and battles in open areas, has established itself on 5 +. It is interesting to see the recording of the work of this "shaitan arba" in a real battle with all the consequences of its application.
    1. _Ugene_
      _Ugene_ 4 September 2017 12: 22
      +3
      the fact of the matter is that no one uploads the video, and without it all these words - "demonstrated his best qualities in Syria" are worthless, advertising
    2. ProkletyiPirat
      ProkletyiPirat 4 September 2017 13: 16
      +3
      BMPT terminator is useless in the city!
      she cannot shoot 360 degrees with grenade launchers
      it cannot hit the enemy hidden behind the concrete, for 30mm will not penetrate the prepared firing point
      So in the city she has no place!
      1. IS-80_RVGK2
        IS-80_RVGK2 4 September 2017 14: 47
        +1
        Quote: ProkletyiPirat
        BMPT terminator is useless in the city!

        Who are you writing this to? There have already been written a hundred times about the flaws of the car, but the cast-iron BMPT fans are not readers.
        1. ProkletyiPirat
          ProkletyiPirat 4 September 2017 18: 18
          0
          Well, if at least one fan becomes less, I will be glad :)
  11. mlad
    mlad 4 September 2017 11: 56
    +3
    A 57 mm gun would be the most for him, both in size and ammunition.
    1. DimerVladimer
      DimerVladimer 4 September 2017 14: 16
      +3
      Quote: mlad
      A 57 mm gun would be the most for him, both in size and ammunition.


      And more effective:
      - 57 mm spark - in one barrel of the BB for fortified or armored targets, in another RP or with a programmable remote detonation for suppression in the zone of 500-4000 m
      - 40 mm grenade launcher with a circular sector of fire for covering the near zone of 50-2000 m
      - heavy machine gun Kord

      And the second option is support with a combat module from a pair of 120 mm mortars.
  12. tchoni
    tchoni 4 September 2017 11: 57
    +8
    Purely theoretically, BMPT has no advantages either in front of a tank or in front of a heavy BMP. We are told that practical experience has shown the opposite. But they do not allow judging about it, because, apart from epithets, there is no information about the combat use of this device.
    1. Vadmir
      Vadmir 4 September 2017 12: 07
      +2
      Purely theoretically, BMPT has no advantages either in front of a tank or in front of a heavy BMP.
      Perhaps a heavy BMP looks preferable, not everything can be shot from cannons, something needs to be cleaned up with infantry.
      1. Whaler
        Whaler 4 September 2017 12: 28
        +2
        Quote: Vadmir
        Purely theoretically, BMPT has no advantages either in front of a tank or in front of a heavy BMP.
        Perhaps a heavy BMP looks preferable, not everything can be shot from cannons, something needs to be cleaned up with infantry.

        Different tasks) it is time to move away from the templates, a three-way scheme: tank - BMPT - TBMP, the "universal" machine will be the loser against such a team, always. I hope that they will create shock armored units precisely according to this scheme. BMPT - this should be a flurry of high-precision and effective fire aimed at destroying the enemy infantry and anti-tank missile and NO other functions, such as transporting l / s.
        1. Vadmir
          Vadmir 4 September 2017 12: 51
          +2
          Different tasks) it is time to move away from the templates, a three-way scheme: tank - BMPT - TBMP, the "universal" machine will be the loser against such a team, always.
          I agree, but do not forget about the cost, in terms of price and efficiency, the "universal" machine is the winner. The heterogeneity of technology complicates the command and control of the unit.
          time to move away from patterns
          The same recommendation is for you, a heavy infantry fighting vehicle, unlike a light infantry fighting vehicle, it can go in the same ranks with tanks along with l / s and land it only to clean up strong points.
          BMPT - this should be a barrage of high-precision and effective fire aimed at destroying enemy infantry and anti-tank missiles
          Two barrels of 30mm caliber is an excessive barrage of fire. And it’s not too cost-effective to hit the infantry with such a caliber, machine guns are more likely to be needed. BMP-15 to cope with such tasks is not much worse.
        2. ProkletyiPirat
          ProkletyiPirat 4 September 2017 13: 24
          +2
          Quote: Whaler
          triune scheme: tank - BMPT - TBMP, the "universal" machine will be the loser against such a team, always.

          Dear Kitoboy, explain what the "universal tank" (I take the T72 with the new turret as the basis) with armament 125mm + 30mm + AGS + machine gun will be WORSE BMPT terminator?
          Although I'm asking the wrong question! What would be better than two tanks with voiced weapons or one regular T72 and one BMPT terminator?
          1. IS-80_RVGK2
            IS-80_RVGK2 4 September 2017 14: 50
            0
            Quote: ProkletyiPirat
            What would be better than two tanks with voiced weapons or one regular T72 and one BMPT terminator?

            In a spherical combat situation in a vacuum? Then of course it will be better (substitute what you like more).
        3. tchoni
          tchoni 4 September 2017 13: 37
          +1
          Quote: Whaler
          triune scheme: tank - BMPT - TBMP,

          And, excuse me, why is the BMPT here, if the TBMP has, in fact, the same armament? TBMP in this triangle to enter love) And it turns out, I'm sorry, somehow it’s not kosher "he" + "it" + "she"))))
          1. IS-80_RVGK2
            IS-80_RVGK2 4 September 2017 14: 52
            +1
            Quote: tchoni
            And, excuse me, why is the BMPT here, if the TBMP has, in fact, the same weapons? (We look at the T-15, “Kurgan”, “boomerang” - the same combination of gun + machine gun + ptur (+ ags))

            In its current form, the car is no good. It is required to change the design, composition of weapons and crew.
            1. ProkletyiPirat
              ProkletyiPirat 4 September 2017 18: 23
              0
              Quote: IS-80_RVGK2
              In its current form, the car is no good. It is required to change the design, composition of weapons and crew.

              Please describe the composition of the weapons of the BMPT and the combat scenario of its use in which it is the BMPT that will allow you to perform a combat mission, and \ or will reduce the loss of drugs.
              1. IS-80_RVGK2
                IS-80_RVGK2 4 September 2017 21: 12
                0
                Quote: ProkletyiPirat
                Please describe the composition of the weapons of the BMPT and the combat scenario of its use in which it is the BMPT that will allow you to perform a combat mission, and \ or will reduce the loss of drugs.

                120-152 mm short-barreled gun with large angles of vertical guidance +70 ..- 10 somewhere like that, low-medium ballistics, 45 mm autocannon the same angles, 7,62 mm machine gun, the same angles. This is the main tower. There is a separate machine gun module of 7,62 mm on the turret. The second tower is in front of the main one. Armament machine gun 12,7-14,5 mm and AGS 45 mm. Crew 4 people. Two weapons operators, a mechanical driver, a commander. Tank support on the offensive. The assault and mopping up of settlements.
                1. ProkletyiPirat
                  ProkletyiPirat 4 September 2017 21: 50
                  0
                  Quote: IS-80_RVGK2
                  Tank support on the offensive. The assault and mopping up of settlements.

                  this is not a combat scenario (combat situation) this is the name of the theater of war.
                  Quote: IS-80_RVGK2
                  The second tower is in front of the main one. Armament machine gun 12,7-14,5 mm and AGS 45 mm.

                  1) what is the second tower for?
                  2) what strategic and / or tactical advantages will it give?
                  3) why it is impossible to place the AGS 45mm on the main tower? because then you don’t have to create a new suspension (two towers will not fit into the suspension from the MBT)
                  1. IS-80_RVGK2
                    IS-80_RVGK2 5 September 2017 02: 03
                    0
                    Quote: ProkletyiPirat
                    this is not a combat scenario (combat situation) this is the name of the theater of war.

                    Theater is a bit more
                    Quote: ProkletyiPirat
                    1) what is the second tower for?

                    The second independent channel of fire.
                    Quote: ProkletyiPirat
                    2) what strategic and / or tactical advantages will it give?

                    It will give the opportunity to fire on two objects at once.
                    Quote: ProkletyiPirat
                    3) why it is impossible to place the AGS 45mm on the main tower? because then you don’t have to create a new suspension (two towers will not fit into the suspension from the MBT)

                    How and where? How is a separate module either in a pair with guns or rigidly to the tower at the back?
                    1. ProkletyiPirat
                      ProkletyiPirat 5 September 2017 02: 21
                      0
                      Quote: IS-80_RVGK2

                      Quote: ProkletyiPirat
                      1) what is the second tower for?

                      The second independent channel of fire.
                      Quote: ProkletyiPirat
                      2) what strategic and / or tactical advantages will it give?

                      It will give the opportunity to fire on two objects at once.

                      This is not required, the car does not drive alone, practice in the Second World War showed the futility of multi-tower tanks, as this limits the power of weapons and the amount of equipment. Also, practice has shown that most of the time these additional turrets do not fire and therefore are even more useless. At the same time, the analysis showed the most optimal number of 3 crew members, this on the one hand allows reducing the reserved volume (and therefore a bunch of other parameters), and also allows using the same human resource to have more tanks, 200 \ 250 \ 333 tanks per thousand people, respectively 5 \ 4 \ 3 people.

                      Quote: IS-80_RVGK2
                      Quote: ProkletyiPirat
                      3) why it is impossible to place the AGS 45mm on the main tower? because then you don’t have to create a new suspension (two towers will not fit into the suspension from the MBT)

                      How and where? How is a separate module either in a pair with guns or rigidly to the tower at the back?

                      AGS on the tower, or in a pair with a machine gun and a panoramic sight or in a furious space without a stabilization drive, The second option is preferable.
                      1. IS-80_RVGK2
                        IS-80_RVGK2 5 September 2017 13: 39
                        0
                        Quote: ProkletyiPirat
                        It is not required

                        It is required if the car is going to fulfill the functions of infantry to support tanks. And in urban battles this also does not interfere.
                        Quote: ProkletyiPirat
                        practice in the Second World War showed the futility of multi-tower tanks, as this limits the power of weapons and the amount of equipment.

                        It was also very bad there with target detection, aiming and other informational components and arms control. But a lot has changed since World War 2.
                        Quote: ProkletyiPirat
                        Also, practice has shown that most of the time these additional turrets do not fire and therefore are even more useless.

                        I do not propose building a multi-tower monster. 2 towers is optimal in my opinion. Multi-turret tanks had problems with the firing sectors; in the case of my layout option, they are not so significant, two weapons operators are the optimal amount for controlling weapons, when there are more problems with command, when the fire density decreases significantly, plus this is the ability to monitor the environment and this amount is not greater than in the same Abrams or Merkava.
                        Quote: ProkletyiPirat
                        Moreover, the analysis showed the most optimal number of 3 crew members

                        In Merkava 4 and 4 in Abrams. This is a very controversial issue.
                        Quote: ProkletyiPirat
                        or in a cramped space without stabilization drive

                        It will be rigidly connected to the tower, which will not allow simultaneous fire on several targets. If placed in a separate tower, there is such an opportunity, which will dramatically increase the firing capabilities of the machine.
                      2. ProkletyiPirat
                        ProkletyiPirat 5 September 2017 17: 57
                        0
                        Quote: IS-80_RVGK2
                        Required if the machine is going serve as tank support infantry.And in urban battles, this also does not interfere.

                        How does an BMP get into the attic of a wooden house to check for an ambush?
                        How BMPT will go around all the internal premises inside the high-rise building?
                        How will the BMPT be able to check the greenback for an ambush?
                        How will the BMPT be able to “support” a tank that is 50-100m ahead and fired from the building? The answer "open fire" is not accepted because the shelling sector is closed by building ceilings. The answer "drive up and shoot" is not accepted because by then the enemy group will already destroy the tank (fire from the TCP) and leave the position.

                        BMPT is incapable of fulfilling the above-mentioned "infantry functions", so what such "infantry functions" will the BMPT perform?
                        Quote: IS-80_RVGK2
                        In Merkava 4 and 4 in Abrams. This is a very controversial issue.

                        This is no longer a controversial issue, get a loader or get an additional 83 tanks? And even if there is no money for 83 tanks, you can get 250 fighters in support of the tanks.
                        Quote: IS-80_RVGK2
                        It will be rigidly connected to the tower, which will not allow simultaneous fire on several targets.

                        And this is not necessary, there is no need to shoot in all directions at once! because technology does not fight on its own! There are other tanks nearby, and fire zones are distributed between them!
                      3. IS-80_RVGK2
                        IS-80_RVGK2 5 September 2017 21: 38
                        0
                        Quote: ProkletyiPirat
                        How does an BMP get into the attic of a wooden house to check for an ambush?

                        This should be done by infantry.
                        Quote: ProkletyiPirat
                        How BMPT will go around all the internal premises inside the high-rise building?
                        How will the BMPT be able to check the greenback for an ambush?

                        This should also be done by infantry. I am not saying that the BMPT should take on all the functions of motorized rifles. In fact, what I am proposing is something like a hybrid BMPT and an assault gun.

                        Quote: ProkletyiPirat
                        This is no longer a controversial issue, get a loader or get an additional 83 tanks? And even if there is no money for 83 tanks, you can get 250 fighters in support of the tanks.

                        There are a bunch of other parameters that for some reason you do not take into account.
                        Quote: ProkletyiPirat
                        And this is not necessary, there is no need to shoot in all directions at once!

                        Why in all directions at once? Where did I write about this?
                        Quote: ProkletyiPirat
                        There are other tanks nearby, and fire zones are distributed between them!

                        And there are a bunch of calculations of anti-tank systems and enemy rocket launchers for each tank. And there is infantry that must fight them and there is a flurry of enemy fire that will mow this infantry and its density will be much higher and it will be much more accurate than in the second world war. Therefore, they switch to TBTR, TBMP.
                      4. ProkletyiPirat
                        ProkletyiPirat 5 September 2017 22: 26
                        0
                        Quote: IS-80_RVGK2
                        This should be done by infantry.

                        Yes, I already said it myself, you better answer my question What will BMPT do then? What are these "infantry functions" it will perform? yes one answer, NO!
                        Quote: IS-80_RVGK2
                        There are a bunch of other parameters that for some reason you do not take into account.

                        I take everything perfectly into account, I just don’t see any reason to paint because what I described is more than enough. Well, let's say I’ll say that the reserved volume decreases and it, in turn, pulls a decrease in mass, an increase in the thickness of the armor, I will say about an increase in rate of fire, etc. All these advantages can be achieved in other ways, and a discussion of these ways will lead the conversation away from the main topic, which makes no sense. Therefore, he pointed out the most important in my opinion, namely the more efficient use of the human resource.
                        Quote: IS-80_RVGK2
                        Therefore, they switch to TBTR, TBMP.

                        Well, the fact of the matter is that they are switching to TBTR / TBMP, and not to BMPT! You really care about the BMPT, and I argue that it is not needed, and instead it is possible to change the armament of promising tanks and TBMP, as well as the existing T72, which will be a more efficient expenditure of resources, in comparison with the introduction of a new type of equipment under the conceptual model " BMPT ".
      2. Topotun
        Topotun 4 September 2017 16: 41
        +2
        In fact, any equipment in the city WITHOUT SUPPORT for infantry is doomed. Heavy equipment must go behind infantry units carrying out their support by fire. And in this case, BMPT is probably preferable because the range of weapons for close combat is greater.
        1. Glory1974
          Glory1974 4 September 2017 17: 03
          +1
          Heavy equipment must go behind infantry units carrying out their support by fire.

          This is a tactic of the times of the Second World War. Then the Faust cartridge fired at 50-100 meters. Now the ATGM and grenade launcher hits much further, it makes no sense to go ahead of the armor. Therefore, they are trying to come up with something like "Terminator".
  13. Whaler
    Whaler 4 September 2017 12: 19
    +3
    A very necessary car ... but only with no 2A42, albeit with a pair .... 57mm from Burevestnik, and even in the "Derivation" version, yes there it is - what you need, direct range 4tm, pace 120, programmable fuse - great fly swatter))
    1. Vadmir
      Vadmir 4 September 2017 12: 54
      +2
      57mm from the Petrel, and even in the “Derivation” version, yes there it is - what you need, direct range 4tm, pace 120, programmable fuse - great fly swatter
      This option really has advantages over a heavy infantry fighting vehicle.
  14. Radikal
    Radikal 4 September 2017 12: 26
    +2
    The terminator’s combat experience was also analyzed by Kazakhstan partners. According to the author, in the army of Kazakhstan, company tank tactical groups are being created. They include the upgraded T-72B and BMP-2, which received additional trellis screens. They will be supported as “terminators” purchased in Russia.
    Who is going to fight with Kazakhstan? wassat
    1. Glory1974
      Glory1974 4 September 2017 17: 05
      +1
      Who is going to fight with Kazakhstan?

      The military are going to fight, in any country, with any enemy. They have such a job.
  15. Whaler
    Whaler 4 September 2017 12: 35
    +3
    Quote: tchoni
    Purely theoretically, BMPT has no advantages either in front of a tank or in front of a heavy BMP. We are told that practical experience has shown the opposite. But they do not allow judging about it, because, apart from epithets, there is no information about the combat use of this device.

    What are the benefits? These are machines with OWN tasks, for TBMP - to deliver their troops to the front (attack line), safe and sound, and only then support it with fire; for BMPT - suppression of the infantry and anti-tank vehicles of the enemy being in the same battle formations with tanks, without distraction of efforts to unusual tasks.
    1. ProkletyiPirat
      ProkletyiPirat 4 September 2017 13: 26
      +1
      Quote: Whaler
      These are cars with YOUR tasks

      why the tank can’t perform the voiced tasks? Why create a new type of equipment if you can upgrade existing T72 giving them the necessary weapons?
    2. tchoni
      tchoni 4 September 2017 13: 44
      +1
      Quote: Whaler
      What are the benefits? These are machines with OWN tasks, for TBMP - to deliver their troops to the front (attack line), safe and sound, and only then support it with fire; for BMPT - suppression of the infantry and anti-tank vehicles of the enemy being in the same battle formations with tanks, without distraction of efforts to unusual tasks.

      But what about tanks? Just go ...... go to Nafik? -)))))
    3. tchoni
      tchoni 4 September 2017 14: 07
      +1
      And if you don’t be malicious, as in my previous comment (excuse me, I didn’t hold back), a very interesting picture is drawn: (right now bricks and sticks will fly at me) the tank in the form in which it is is outdated! Yes, yes, it is outdated. Judge for yourself: the whole look of modern tanks is formed under the task of combating the self-similar. A powerful gun with a high initial velocity of the projectile and small ammunition, powerful frontal armor, ammunition designed to defeat mostly well-defended targets, the crew (more precisely, its number) is capable of effectively solving one fire task in one, in fact (remember, how many our tanks remotely controlled turrets) channel guidance and destruction of weapons. And he, designed for a knightly duel with his own kind, is offered to chase archers in the trees (grenade launchers in urban areas). Alas and ah - the result is often deplorable. You can, of course, ask, but what about the WWII experience? The fact of the matter is that, even at the end of the Second World War, the tank-living manpower of the enemy was not SO tank-dangerous as it is now. (you must admit, it is very difficult to compare the Faustpatron with a firing range of up to 120 meters and armor penetration of about 100 mm even with the old RPG-7) So now there is a rethinking of the role and place of the tank in modern combat. More precisely, not even the tank itself, but its weapons. From here various "BMPTs" appear. So, non-tank units should BMPT supplement, and vice versa, motorized rifle, and transplant them to quite adequate armor.
      Here, it seems to have spoken out, now the can of kidazzo with tomatoes)))))
      1. ProkletyiPirat
        ProkletyiPirat 4 September 2017 18: 31
        0
        Quote: tchoni
        the tank as it is is out of date!

        Not the "tank" but the concept of its use is obsolete, what is commonly called the "MBT". In the USSR / RF, the name of the technique, the type of technique and the concept of technology are constantly confused, and the reason is to use the same words to describe different terms.
        For example, the concept of "MBT" is the third concept for the development of tanks, effective until the appearance of anti-tank systems and their carriers in the form of helicopters \ UAVs and infantry
  16. Whaler
    Whaler 4 September 2017 12: 46
    0
    If you cover such a ram (MBT - BMPT - TBMP) with an waterproof air defense umbrella, then it will most likely be able to break through ANY defense. And there it is a matter of tactical training and coherence, the Germans at one time well taught (including on their own heads) to hit armored rams in the joint of defense in convergent directions, coverage - environment - destruction ...
  17. forcecom
    forcecom 4 September 2017 12: 46
    +3
    Well, we are waiting for posts from the fighters of the Armed Forces of Ukraine as they destroyed a couple of dozens of these of your "Terminators", however, as luck would have it, flash memory on cameras and phones lit up during development laughing (everyday life).
    By the way, the Terminator is not only an iron truncheon performed by the governor. It is also the border between Light and Shadow (darkness) on the planet, so in this interpretation the name of this combat vehicle is understood and perceived much better.
  18. Whaler
    Whaler 4 September 2017 12: 49
    0
    Quote: dvina71
    Chet Messenger of Mordovia burns .. TOS-s in tank units? EMNIP they were with chemists .., where actually they have a place.

    Chemists had them NOT because they belong there, but in compliance with international conventions. )))
  19. Bronevick
    Bronevick 4 September 2017 13: 12
    0
    Finally. We have been waiting for this for a long time.
  20. Doliva63
    Doliva63 4 September 2017 13: 23
    +7
    Are you going to fight in Syria? Funny Tagil drives tactics of the Russian Armed Forces laughing good
  21. DimerVladimer
    DimerVladimer 4 September 2017 13: 34
    +2
    According to the Kazakh military, "BMPT can replace 2-2,5 infantry combat vehicles or 3-4 BTRs by its combat potential, and surpasses two motorized rifle platoons in firepower."


    I doubt the competence of those who made the conclusions.
    The fact is that two motorized rifle platoons cannot be disabled by one Javelin ATGM ... They can simultaneously hold up to 16 targets under fire, and BMPTs - up to a maximum of 3
    Those. the conclusion is made without regard to the combat stability of the BMPT.
    1. tchoni
      tchoni 4 September 2017 14: 53
      +1
      Great comment, standing ovation! You, in addition to the picture, still remind readers that there are six such squads in two platoons (platoons? -)))) and this, in fact, is a slightly battered company. And yet, they are supposed to have six BMPs in the state, since we are talking about the separation on the BMP)))
      1. DimerVladimer
        DimerVladimer 4 September 2017 15: 37
        0
        Quote: tchoni
        You, in addition to the picture, still remind readers that there are six such sections in two platoons (platoons? -))))

        By the way - yes, I compared the effectiveness of the two divisions on the BMP-2 and BMPT - if you take into account 2 motorized platoons, and even with attached BMPs - then the comparison is clearly in favor of motorized rifles.
  22. Clueless
    Clueless 4 September 2017 13: 41
    0
    Quote: vkl.47
    The module itself is rather weak. It is necessary not 4 but 8 ATGMs. Make a 57mm cannon with a coaxial 30 and an extra cord machine gun. It's not like he doesn’t pull on the terminator. Old Werther and then stronger))


    Werther, by the way, is a fighting android if that;) That's why he withstood blaster shots in this fantasy.
  23. demos1111
    demos1111 4 September 2017 14: 01
    0
    Quote: vkl.47
    The module itself is rather weak. It is necessary not 4 but 8 ATGMs. Make a 57mm cannon with a coaxial 30 and an extra cord machine gun. It's not like he doesn’t pull on the terminator. Old Werther and then stronger))

    And why didn’t the electronics please you? In the film, he will be stronger than the terminator. I would take the load with an equivalent rod, disperse as it should, and butted the poor fellow of the terminator.
    It was just that the electronics was peaceful, calm.
  24. Whaler
    Whaler 4 September 2017 15: 00
    0
    Quote: ProkletyiPirat
    Quote: Whaler
    triune scheme: tank - BMPT - TBMP, the "universal" machine will be the loser against such a team, always.

    Dear Kitoboy, explain what the "universal tank" (I take the T72 with the new turret as the basis) with armament 125mm + 30mm + AGS + machine gun will be WORSE BMPT terminator?
    Although I'm asking the wrong question! What would be better than two tanks with voiced weapons or one regular T72 and one BMPT terminator?

    Amazing things you formulate)) And didn’t you forget the laser blaster for an hour?)) Any combined arms lieutenant will tell you that the second option is better. You would have to listen to 2-3 couples about the tactics of the MSV in the offensive and some memoirs of someone to read, well, of the same Shamanov))
  25. Best
    Best 4 September 2017 15: 12
    0
    Quote: Radikal
    The terminator’s combat experience was also analyzed by Kazakhstan partners. According to the author, in the army of Kazakhstan, company tank tactical groups are being created. They include the upgraded T-72B and BMP-2, which received additional trellis screens. They will be supported as “terminators” purchased in Russia.
    Who is going to fight with Kazakhstan? wassat


    1. In this case, a new weapon is being discussed, and not who is going to fight with whom. Be correct.
    2. In one of the posts you were already offered at first to acquire broad and deep knowledge and only on the basis of them to state your vision. Listen, very helpful.
  26. Best
    Best 4 September 2017 15: 20
    0
    Quote: ProkletyiPirat
    Quote: Whaler
    These are cars with YOUR tasks

    why the tank can’t perform the voiced tasks? Why create a new type of equipment if you can upgrade existing T72 giving them the necessary weapons?


    In the process of hostilities, the tank can perform many functions, but at the same time, the tank has the main functions, the main tasks are set for it, for which, basically, it was created and which it must successfully perform. According to your logic, why create fighter planes at a time when you can hang a lot of additional weapons on a bomber and it will be an excellent tool. IMHO.
  27. Best
    Best 4 September 2017 15: 39
    0
    Quote: Radikal
    The terminator’s combat experience was also analyzed by Kazakhstan partners. According to the author, in the army of Kazakhstan, company tank tactical groups are being created. They include the upgraded T-72B and BMP-2, which received additional trellis screens. They will be supported as “terminators” purchased in Russia.
    Who is going to fight with Kazakhstan? wassat


    1. In this case, it is not discussed who is going to fight with whom, but a new weapon;
    2 .. In one of the posts, I remember, it was already recommended that you initially acquire deep and wide knowledge on each aspect discussed. Listen, very helpful. IMHO
  28. Grach-25sm
    Grach-25sm 4 September 2017 18: 36
    0
    By the way, the story with BMPT “Terminator” is an example of a balanced and even wise approach. They created another “super-crap”, but there is no place for them in the tactics of units yet. They sold a limited amount to Kazakhstan in order to “run through” the realities of the service in order to verify operational characteristics, and they themselves began to create the BMPT-2, which was even more unified while maintaining combat effectiveness. Then they sent the BMPT to Syria, where that car was “in its element”. And now you can buy for your own army, slowly, without too much noise. Well done! hi
  29. Synthesis
    Synthesis 4 September 2017 20: 49
    0
    why did you remove the ags from him?
  30. Radikal
    Radikal 4 September 2017 21: 22
    0
    Quote: glory1974
    Who is going to fight with Kazakhstan?

    The military are going to fight, in any country, with any enemy. They have such a job.

    I clarify - what are the enemies of Kazakhstan? laughing
  31. Megamarcel
    Megamarcel 7 September 2017 08: 43
    +1
    Wonderful things. There was a combat use, but no photos and videos. But there is a full video where half-naked Syrians are fighting with ancient Soviet weapons.