T-15 will be the most powerful BMP in the world

The concept of a heavy infantry fighting vehicle T-15 "Armata" laid a huge potential for its development. None of the existing machines of similar purpose can be compared with the development of engineers from Nizhny Tagil, writes Messenger of Mordovia.

“The BMP has reliable modular anti-cannon armor. Thanks to this, as well as the existing active protection complex, the T-15 is not afraid of sub-caliber ammunition tank guns and guided missiles. Also, the designers have thoroughly worked on the protection against mines. The crew and the troopers are seated in special chairs, which should minimize the consequences of explosions, ”says Lev Romanov's article.

The machine was presented with an uninhabited combat module with an 30-mm cannon, a twin machine gun and the Kornet ATGM complex.

It is assumed that "the further development of the T-15 armament will be to equip the machine with a new Epoch combat module with an 57-mm automatic cannon and two types of guided missiles - in addition to the Cornets with an 8-mm range and the 1300 mm armor-piercing capability, multi-purpose UR will appear" Bulat "", the author writes.

“Bulaty” are intended to destroy lightly armored vehicles: infantry fighting vehicles, armored personnel carriers, armored reconnaissance vehicles, self-propelled guns, as well as enemy vehicles and firing points.

Also as an option is possible to install 57-mm automatic artillery AU-220М. The rate of guns - 80-100 shots / min. Aim range - 8000 m. Vertical / horizontal guidance angles -5 - + 60 / 360 degrees.

It is noted that the T-15 with the engine in 1500 hp It will be able to develop high speeds of movement, giving the uniformed formations previously unseen opportunities.

According to the information of the OJSC "Design Bureau of Transport Engineering", at the moment the heavy BMP has completed road tests.

Comments

[Anarchist]

Why is the t-15 not yet in Syria? Or...
Maybe they didn’t notice?

[St Petrov]

let them roll away at the training ground. In the raw thing in the war I would not have climbed. in theory, of course, all this is good, but it would be better if nothing went wrong at the crucial moment, and according to the law of the genre it happens

[jjj]

The practice of wars shows that the wave can be fought on existing equipment. This has already touched for the next fights

[Romario_Argo]

The practice of wars shows that the wave can be fought on existing equipment. This has already touched for the next fights

Syria is a conflict of varying intensity from guerrilla warfare to full-blown fronts and boilers.
And the enemy is different: tribal militia, deserters, Bedouin mercenaries, PMC mercenaries, special forces of various states.
T-15 at least for our PMCs in Syria

[Going]

Quote: Anarchist

Why is the t-15 not yet in Syria? Or...
Maybe they didn’t notice?

Alexander, it seems still raw, did not dare.

[Chestnut]

Quote: jjj

The practice of wars shows that the wave can be fought on existing equipment. This has already touched for the next fights

Practice shows that in Syria, with the onset of terrorists, tankers flee from Soviet tanks, because to stay inside the car is suicide.

As for T15, the car was not in battle, because all exclamations are useless.
And yet, rearmament is proceeding extremely slowly, if in 2050 we have one hundred and two hundred T15 cars, then there will be a miracle.
The Americans set a goal to build 17000 units (imagine this number) Oshkosh l-atb, replacing the Humvee, in twenty years, this is ambition!
Russia can’t build so much in three hundred years!

[venik]

Quote: Chestnut

Practice shows that in Syria, with the onset of terrorists, tankers flee from Soviet tanks, because to stay inside the car is suicide.

===============
INTERESTING, but in "Abrashka", "Lyopikah" and "ceremonial shoes" called "Leclerc", to remain under fire from RPG-7, "Fogotov", Metisov, "Cornet" and "TOU-2" - this NOT "SUICIDE"??
Let's start with the fact that crew behavior - this is first of all - a characteristic combat readiness ARMY !!! AND in no way - otherwise !!! If - "coward" and "amateur" - there is nothing into the tank "pop"! Sit on the couch!

[Chestnut]

Quote: venik

INTERESTING, but in "Abrashka", "Lyopikah" and "ceremonial shoes" called "Leclerc", to remain under fire from RPG-7, "Fogotov", Metisov, "Cornet" and "TOU-2" - this NOT "SUICIDE"??

To a much lesser extent.

Let's start with the fact that crew behavior - this is first of all - a characteristic combat readiness ARMY !!! AND in no way - otherwise !!! If - "coward" and "amateur" - there is nothing into the tank "pop"! Sit on the couch!

Military education and training is important, and alas, Russia is far behind NATO in this direction.
But I think you will not argue, well-trained Aborigines are not able to withstand technology.

The Russians did not learn a terrible history lesson, the councils lost ~ 20 million people due to the technical superiority of the enemy.

[St Petrov]

Military education and training is important, and alas, Russia is far behind NATO in this direction.

Wow. And who exactly in NATO is ahead of the Russian Federation in military education? Romanians? England? Maybe the Germans? Or Latvians

It’s not funny to write this yourself?

well-trained aborigines are not able to resist technology.

is it about the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation?)

To a much lesser extent.

are leopards harder to burn? And who calculated the degree? Daily Mail Magazine?

[karabas-barabas]

Quote: s-t Petrov

Wow. And who exactly in NATO is ahead of the Russian Federation in military education? Romanians? England? Maybe the Germans? Or Latvians
It’s not funny to write this yourself?

At least Germans and Britons. All this can be seen in losses in battles of equal intensity. Especially the English army is considered the most organized and combat-ready, it is the only one that is inferior in size to the American. And there is nothing funny about this. If we take the training of tank crews, back in the 13th Shoigu announced a huge lag in the combat training of tank crews of the Russian Federation from NATO. At the moment, one of the ways to increase the professionalism of crews is simulators, and right up to 2014 it was the Germans, or rather Rheinmetall, besides a host of other components, they also introduced similar technologies in Russia. But in my opinion it was not possible to complete this program until the end.

Quote: s-t Petrov

are leopards harder to burn?

I would not particularly draw ambiguous conclusions from just a couple of photos of the Turkish Army’s padded Leo2A4. We do not know the circumstances of those cases. Judging by the experience of the Germans, Canadians and Danes in Afghanistan, you can see how, after their experience, orders for Leo2 and modernization whales for older cars exploded.

[Asthma]

Yeah, a large part of the civilian population.

[zoolu350]

Quote: Chestnut

The Russians did not learn a terrible history lesson, the councils lost ~ 20 million people due to the technical superiority of the enemy.

The USSR lost 20 million people, not because of the technical superiority of the Euro-fascists, but because of their pathological love for the destruction of the civilian population, where individuals like you actively helped them.

[Cossack 471]

The creepy lesson of history is this. that our army had to behave like that in Europe. how the "civilized" Europeans behaved in our country. then now, at the word Russia, they would sweat like a whore in a church and would not dream of a great Romania. then about great Poland
Once every 100 years, all the trash is collected. to rob Russia

[sedoj]

Quote: Chestnut

Quote: venik

INTERESTING, but in "Abrashka", "Lyopikah" and "ceremonial shoes" called "Leclerc", to remain under fire from RPG-7, "Fogotov", Metisov, "Cornet" and "TOU-2" - this NOT "SUICIDE"??

To a much lesser extent.

Let's start with the fact that crew behavior - this is first of all - a characteristic combat readiness ARMY !!! AND in no way - otherwise !!! If - "coward" and "amateur" - there is nothing into the tank "pop"! Sit on the couch!

Military education and training is important, and alas, Russia is far behind NATO in this direction.
But I think you will not argue, well-trained Aborigines are not able to withstand technology.

The Russians did not learn a terrible history lesson, the councils lost ~ 20 million people due to the technical superiority of the enemy.

Quote: Chestnut

The Russians did not learn a terrible history lesson, the councils lost ~ 20 million people due to the technical superiority of the enemy.

Are you serious? Read the sources - the combat losses of the crew and the USSR during the Second World War are comparable. Which amounted to just over six million on each side.

[Black5Raven]

Quote: sedoj

combat losses of the crew and the USSR during the Second World War are comparable. Which amounted to just over six million on each side.

Which did not stop losing millions in the boilers of the 41st. Somehow they try not to remember about this period of the war.

[Alone]

Why, shaw!? Or maybe the punishers of the country whose flag you are flying here destroyed the civilian population of the USSR almost to zero!? If the Soviet troops adhered to the same principle, how many losses would a "technically" superior "enemy have? And how so" did the German genius "embrace the Soviet" barbarian "? Take the trouble to at least look at the statistics of the military and civil losses of the USSR and do not smack nonsense.

[Krabik]

I would like to correct the moment with "the councils lost ~ 20 million people due to the technical superiority of the enemy."

France, too, was defeated with Germany, but no one organized genocide there.

Maybe I'm wrong, but perhaps such losses were not only due to the backwardness of the Soviets, which is undoubtedly true, but also because of the frank genocide of the Slavic people to increase the population of Asians in the world?

Well, that is, what Comrade Hitler said about the Aryans, just the opposite, we will kill whites so that there are more Asians and Blacks;)

[karabas-barabas]

Quote: venik

INTERESTING, but in "Abrashka", "Lyopikah" and "ceremonial shoes" called "Leclerc", to remain under fire from RPG-7, "Fogotov", Metisov, "Cornet" and "TOU-2" is NOT "SUICIDE "????

As practice shows, the crew remains intact, except that the pants are ragged. That is, undermining the BC does not destroy the crew, due to design features. This can be seen in the video of the tests of the bombing of the BC in Abrams, and in the video of real military operations, as for example in Yemen, when the Hussites knocked out Abrams the Emirate, who at first blazed well, but after a short time, when the flame became smaller, it was possible to observe as hatches open and the whole crew jumped out of the tank. This is the main difference, which allows Abrams and Leopards 2 to be upgraded for another decades, and the T-64-72 series tanks and their descendants after conflicts of different intensities, with the presence of a large number of IEDs and mines and ATGMs, showed that survival when overcoming armor is zero. And by the way, it is impossible to significantly increase mine protection for tanks of the T-64-72 series and their descendants, since the resource in place and weight is completely exhausted, when both Abramsov and Leo2 managed to significantly increase this indicator. The article mentioned enhanced protection against mines and land mines, but there is no other information besides special chairs. In modern Leo2, for example, a mechanical drive lies reclining in an armchair that is attached to the roof of the body with straps. In addition, reinforced with additional armor the bottom of the tank.

[Esoteric]

Quote: Chestnut

And yet, rearmament is proceeding extremely slowly, if in 2050 we have one hundred and two hundred T15 cars, then there will be a miracle.

And yet, if by the year 2050 there will be 180-200 million people in Russia (at least), and there will be a hundred or two hundred banks (at least) and there will be as many millionaires (at least) and there will remain one hundred or two hundred thousand officials (behind the eyes), then we in the T-15s, as if in a litter, will rummage ...

[Albert1988]

Quote: Chestnut

Russia can’t build so much in three hundred years!

Ugums, you first look at the pace of riveting by us T-90 for the same India, and then draw conclusions ...

[Hardyhard]

he is out of habit, and with the T-90 they run and ride with open hatches, which is not permissible) they will also run from new ones ... meaning ..

[just exp]

You know, I’ve heard this many times, and then I read the news that according to the results of military operations, so many changes have been added / changed to the design of such products.
that is, they tested and tested there at the training grounds, they all took into account, they all checked, a real war came, and it turns out that again we need to redo it.
because the landfill is good, but it has little relation to a real war.
and there is still a real war, and where it is possible to verify, and it is necessary to verify it in combat conditions. And then, if God gives when the landfill tests are over, there will be no real wars for our armed forces.

[starogil]

Because - "T-15 will become the most powerful infantry fighting vehicle in the world" - when, ah, will it still be?

[Monarchist]

Want to supply the barmalei? Just kidding. But seriously, I wouldn’t give dad her. Under the Union, Ceausescu bargained for the West with all the novelties of the Warsaw Pact that he could get. And after the collapse of the USSR, Ukraine served as a transit of our developments, the site was.
In Syria, the suture is confusing: where are the "moderate" where are the "allies", and where are the "angels" (remember: "beat the red while they get cheaper, beat the white while it turned red"). I would not risk getting in.

[Krabik]

There our units are, and for them, of course, you can give equipment.

But it is not clear to whom to distribute it, then to see her at the training ground in the USA.

[Maz]

As you can see what is not. And there is no armata in Syria. And the fig? In our warehouses, BMP and T62 rust.

[Aaron Zawi]

Quote: Maz

As you can see what is not. And there is no armata in Syria. And the fig? In our warehouses, BMP and T62 rust.

In Ukraine, you have nothing to rust. Something rotted, something burned out, something in the ranks.

[Anarchist]

Aron, you amaze me today! I agree with you almost all day, plus ...
On the street the snow fell!

[Sharky]

equipping the machine with a new combat module "Age" with a 57-mm automatic gun and guided missiles of two types

It seems to me that this module is most optimal in the realities of modern combat. 30mm the gun is good, but its firepower is sometimes insufficient.

[NEXUS]

Quote: Sharky

It seems to me that this module is most optimal in the realities of modern combat.

I believe that it is more optimal to install a Baikal module with a 15 mm automatic cannon on the T-57. In addition, in order for the BK to be tangible, reduce the infantry compartment by a couple of places.
At the same time, the question of BMPT Terminator on the basis of Almaty is very interesting.

[Per se.]

Quote: NEXUS

At the same time, the question of BMPT Terminator on the basis of Almaty is very interesting.

How is it more interesting than BMPT based on T-90 or T-72? Probably nothing more than an ACS Coalition based on the T-90 and it’s on the “golden platform” from Armata, on the principle of “lyuborodo”, “lyubo” in the first case, on a reliable and inexpensive platform T- 90 ... If we talk about the T-15, then as a "police tank" for the Rosguards, it will come down, just like the "Boomerang". I hope time will show why it was necessary to create a “platform” on such an expensive and complicated base.

[NEXUS]

Quote: Per se.

Why is it more interesting than BMPT based on T-90 or T-72?

The base is longer ... it means the BC is bigger, and the engine is more powerful, and all this is heavier, which means the recoil effect will be less.

[Per se.]

Quote: NEXUS

The base is longer ... it means the BC is bigger and the engine is more powerful

Andrew, then at once ...

[Albert1988]

Quote: Per se.

Andrew, then at once ...

So what? There the base is longer by 1 rink, by 1, Karl! The fact that the car turned out to be about a meter longer is how you look how far the VLD and NLD and MTO stick out there, how much it protrudes, and the base there is not as long as it seems at first glance ...

[Per se.]

Quote: Albert1988

So what? There base is longer on the 1 rink, on the 1, Karl!

One, Eugen, one whole! ... The length of the T-35 tank was about 9,7 meters, our mastodon "BMP T-15" is just 9,5 meters, with a weight of 50 tons. The parade ride will come down like an anti-guerrilla machine, like a “police tank” ... How much this behemoth is suitable for a real war, first of all, like a battle vehicle, like a mass car, a question. But, no doubt, the monster is impressive ...

[Albert1988]

Quote: Per se.

For one, Eugen, for one! ... The length of the T-35 tank was about 9,7 meters, our mastodon BMP T-15 was only 9,5 meters, with a weight of 50 tons

Only on the T-15, these 9,7 meters for the most part fall on the forehead and MTO parts protruding outside the body, and the base there is exactly the same length as the MSTA-S, like the abrams and leopard - and all these animals for a minute, ride quite normally and not only in parades, so your retrograde here is inappropriate ...

[Cossack 471]

The monster is really huge. But how to disguise at such a height?

[Albert1988]

Quote: Cossack 471

The monster is really huge. But how to disguise at such a height?

And the military will tell you that, the same Israelis friends somehow mask their carrots, and the height there is about the same.

[Albert1988]

Quote: Per se.

Why is it more interesting than BMPT based on T-90 or T-72?

Trite - it’s convenient and easy to get out of the T-15, unlike the “garden” that can be built on the basis of our old "teshes" ...

[Per se.]

Quote: Albert1988

Trite - it's convenient and easy to get out of the T-15

Probably, even if you take a car based on the T-55 (heavy BTR-T), or already of the BMO-T type, use them in tandem with BMPT, it will be much better than the T-15. As assault groups of troops from 6, people will dismount faster, will be ready for battle faster. The defeat of a machine with a smaller landing force is less critical than with the 9-10 infantrymen in the womb, finally, the combat vehicle itself can be made smaller, better protected, more comfortable to place the landing force. The best heavy BMP is a tandem of BMPT and heavy BTR, the best BMP is BMP-3. Heavy BMP, most likely stupidity, neither fish nor meat, a device that loses the concept of a classic BMP (maneuverability, versatility), and in specificity inferior to BMPT for specialized fire support, and as an APC, losing in the transport component due to the gain in fire support . Of course, this is just my opinion. No more.

[Albert1988]

Quote: Per se.

Of course, this is just my opinion. No more.

That's right - do not consider yourself smarter than the military, who are aware of the realities of modern won.

Quote: Per se.

As an assault group, 6-man landing forces will dismount faster, will be ready for battle faster.

Yes, only from the animals on the chassis of the old tanks this landing will be dismounted corny longer than from the T-15, because the T-15 is specially designed for transportation and landing. Here's the question - where do your paratroopers dismount from the T-55 freaks? Climbing out through the hatches from above, then jumping on the move to the ground in full ammunition, which is inconvenient and exposes them to potential enemy fire. In the T-15, it is enough to lower the aft ramp and the landing will quietly run to the ground even at a decent speed, while it will be completely covered by the armored carcass of the vehicle. Plus, on the armored personnel carrier on the T-55/72/90 chassis, you can’t put decent weapons anymore - you’ve already tried many times - it doesn’t work, but specially adapted for this, the T-15 monster - at least a Baikal with a 57 mm fool. Not to mention the fact that the level of booking, mine protection, etc. The T-15 will surpass by two heads everything that can be riveted on the chassis of old tanks.

Quote: Per se.

the best infantry fighting vehicle is BMP-3.

You first find out what this "best" BMP makes and from what distances - for most of these means the T-15 will be a very tough nut to crack. And most importantly - you take an interest in what it’s like to land from the BMP-3 - crawling over a hot dvigl and then jump to the ground from this position ... Of course, the BMP-3 is a great car, but a niche hurts like a mass BMP is not suitable, although it is also irreplaceable in the troops.

Quote: Per se.

A heavy infantry fighting vehicle, most likely stupid, neither fish nor meat, an apparatus that loses the concept of a classic infantry fighting vehicle (maneuverability, versatility), and in specificity is inferior to an infantry fighting vehicle in specialized fire support

Yeah - only the concept of low-armored and maneuverable infantry fighting vehicles is outdated like a dinosaur - with a cloud of RPGs for every bearded child under each bush, such an infantry fighting vehicle becomes a coffin, but a heavy infantry fighting vehicle with tank armor and KAZ is the very thing. As for the BMPT “inferior” - have you looked at the composition of weapons for a long time at the BMPT and T-15? Or do you seriously think that 2 30-mm guns - well, it’s really much stronger than one?

Quote: Per se.

and as an armored personnel carrier, losing in the transport component due to amplification in fire support

Why on earth? There is no more turret space - wake up - the 21st century in the yard is the time of automatic modules, where everything is in the module itself, and under the module there is nothing to fill in, where a decent infantry landing calmly sits down. By the way, because of this, the border between the armored personnel carrier and the infantry fighting vehicle is gradually being erased - there is essentially no difference in armament and the amount of airborne assault, so we get some very universal APVs that differ only in weight, type of propulsion, etc.

Py.Sy .: Alas, how would you not like to defend the masterpieces of Soviet designers, but alas, they are already out of date, otherwise what else would you think in Soviet times (early 80s) and the T-14 concepts were developed, and T-15 concepts, and even then they understood the need to increase size and mass, as an inevitable consequence of the increased security of combat vehicles. Times are changing, war is changing and requires other military vehicles ...

Py.Py.Sy .:

Quote: Albert1988

like a counterguerilla machine, like a police tank

So the fact of the matter is that it is precisely in this quality that armored vehicles will appear in future wars - additional cleaning up of the area after aviation, missile defense, hypersonic missile defense, missile defense, etc.
Time. when thousands of mobile armored armada won the war long ago ...

[Per se.]

Quote: Albert1988

That's right - do not consider yourself smarter than the military, who are aware of the realities of modern won.

I do not think, although to my "for 50 with hook", there is something to remember, as well as different thoughts, "I have them." However, you are not very shy in your convictions, apparently, you’ve seen everything, you have experienced everything ... As for the opinions of the military, how many wars there have been, how many predictions, rarely did anyone guess. Interesting, here it is, - "So the fact of the matter is that it is in this quality that the armored vehicles will perform in the coming wars - the terrain cleanup after aviation, the KR, hypersonic KR, BR, etc. Time. when thousands of mobile tank armada won the war long gone ...", Did the woman Vanga say to you, or did they calculate it at home on your computer? It’s difficult with you, Evgeny, it seems, there’s a big difference, both in age and in terms of the psycho compatibility, you’re reading a comment, like listening, not hearing. I will try to make it shorter, about T-55, this, as you put it, “freak.” Here is a photo of you, our brothers in Adam and Eve, next to the heavy armored carrier “Akhzarit”, by the way, a remake of trophy T-54 / T-55 As you can see, you can make a feed exit. Now, about the BTR-T, where there is no such thing, the unloading scheme is similar to the BMP-3, which is quite normal, especially if we assume that the "pregnant" infantry armored vehicles have nothing to do in the first line with the tanks. If we talk about your beloved T-15, which was not even accepted for service (I think they will not be accepted), so he, anyway, is not a bomb shelter, the infantry will still have to fight, but this one will climb " Mouse "next to the tanks, burned along with the entire landing force. Also, if the same people often in their comments, the Hosanna sing armored armored, then immediately "UAZ with machine guns", and I want to say that you either "put on the underwear, or remove the cross", there is no equipment that is not killed, there is a correct tactics of its use, this also applies to "duralumin" BMD or BMP. For the rest, I do not see the point of arguing further with you, nevertheless, thank you for your attention.

[Albert1988]

Quote: Per se.

I don’t think so, although I have something to remember for my “over 50 with a hook”, as well as different thoughts, “I have them”. However, you are not very modest in your beliefs, apparently you have seen everything, you have experienced everything ...

It’s just that since I don’t expose my views as true - I simply transmit the opinion of the military - if they created and actively drive in the car, it means the military believes that this is exactly what you need, but you, dear Per se., Sometimes say that it gives the impression that in our General Staff some alternatively gifted people are sitting - they are turning over the child prodigies instead of doing the next modernization / alteration of the old-tested one. I, note, DO NOT deny that the T-90, BMP-3 are excellent cars, but when are they designed? That's right - for a long time, and their supply of modernization is not infinite - this is a fact, and the means of destruction continue to improve - this is also a fact. So, tomorrow it may turn out that the “proven and reliable” today will be just an outdated scrap metal tomorrow, and in order not to remain “naked” we need just armats, because it touched the future.

Quote: Per se.

about the T-55, this, as you put it there, "freak". Here is a photo of our brothers in Adam and Eve, next to the heavy Akhzarit armored personnel carrier

Only there is one big BUT - the comrades from Israel did not do all of these akharits from a good life, but from the fact that there was no alternative, but when the opportunity arose they made the same intention - the exact same T-15 was used in the layout and it was successfully used . It’s just trivial for them to make an ersatz on a trophy’s T-55 chassis much cheaper than making a specialized car - do not compare the Israeli military-industrial complex with the Russian military-industrial complex - the possibilities are not comparable.

Quote: Per se.

Now, about the BTR-T, where there is none, the unloading scheme is similar to the BMP-3, which is quite normal,

Only now there are many reviews of the military that operated the BMP-3, including the extreme "convenience" of dismounting from such a machine. In any case, the scheme with aft placement of the landing and a normal stern ramp is clearly recognized as more convenient.

Quote: Per se.

and he, by any means, not a bomb shelter, the infantry will still have to fight, get out for battle,

That is, the convenience, speed and safety of "getting out" do not play any role for you?

Quote: Per se.

but this "Mouse" will climb near the tanks, it will burn along with the entire landing.

Why should it burn out? Probably from the presence of tank armor, DZ and KAZ? After all, a machine with such a level of protection simply cannot withstand the hit of any anti-tank equipment ... It was ironic ... But seriously - then with the tanks he did not have to fight at the forefront - he needed to be protected from starting any Tou-javelina from under the next bush, and have a good mine protection, which, incidentally, is completely absent from the same T-55.

Quote: Per se.

Also, if the same people in their comments often sing hosiery to the armored hippos, then to the UAZ with machine guns, I’d like to say that you’ll either put on your underpants or remove the cross,

This phrase of yours does not make sense at all - everything has its time - at a certain stage of technical development and the adopted military strategy, “UAZs with machine guns” will be in demand, and in other conditions, “armored hippos” cannot be dispensed with. This is progress, it cannot be stopped, "everything flows, everything changes," as the great thinker said, I simply state this fact. I have a purely utilitarian attitude to military equipment - which is optimal at the moment - I like that)))

Quote: Per se.

there is no equipment not killed, there is the right tactic for its use, this also applies to the "duralumin" BMD or BMP.

Then the question is why are we still not fighting on the T-34, or why did I go to the dump of the history of a cart with a horse-drawn machine gun? The answer is simple - they are out of date, so can "duralumin" BMDs or BMPs, or just become niche ones used for certain tasks. And then - you look at how the same armata runs at the training ground - you won’t say that the beast weighs under 50 tons.

Quote: Per se.

As for the opinions of the military, how many wars have already been, how many forecasts, rarely anyone guessed.

In general, if they approached wisely, then very often - such domestic military men as Triandafillov, Shaposhnikov very accurately described the features of future wars using tank wedges and mechanized highly mobile formations, but there is no need to talk about German blitz krieg theorists. And do not listen to the next “wang” - just look at global trends in weapons and its use and you can draw approximate conclusions. Naturally, there may be “surprises,” but they are for that reason that no one can count them.

Quote: Per se.

Otherwise, I see no reason to argue further with you, nevertheless, thanks for your attention.

I support - it makes no sense to argue with retrogrades - time shows that they always turn out to be wrong. Before the First World War, a huge number of people who talked about how you did - about the "old and proven" were preparing for a war of "dashing cavalry attacks and peppy infantry marches" in the era of machine guns, barbed wire, huge howitzers, etc. So are you, dear Per se. , in the era of the Javelins and other PT-Pribluds that fly out from under each bush and numerous mines, you talk about a low-armored and fast car, like a massive BMP / BTR, when the conditions obviously require a little different equipment. Here our military, together with the military-industrial complex, are trying to empirically determine its appearance.

[Per se.]

Quote: Albert1988

but you, dear Per se., sometimes say in such a way that one gets the impression that we have some alternatively gifted people in the General Staff

Eugene, well, not the same slogans to throw! I have my own opinion, you have your own, what would be different to say - really "Great, George! Excellent, Konstantin!" ... What bothers you in my thoughts, with whom would you argue, with hurray-patriots? I could be mistaken who is without sin, much worse if our generals and politicians are wrong. Maybe, if they would read such comments, you see, they would scratch their turnip once again, it would not be worse. Well, who has the “copper forehead”, there is, of course, nothing to think about and doubt, they always go the “right” way, and ordinary soldiers and officers will pay for their obstinacy and lack of talent in the war for which the army was not ready .

[Albert1988]

Quote: Per se.

I have my own opinion, you have your own, which would otherwise be said - is it really “Great, George! Great, Konstantin!” ... What annoys you in my thoughts, who would you argue with, cheers-patriots?

Here you are absolutely right and I completely agree with you.

Quote: Per se.

Maybe if they read such comments, you look, they would scratch their turnips again, it would not get worse.

Well, I think that nevertheless, there, “upstairs”, before making decisions, we nevertheless carried out some kind of analysis of the situation. Well, you and I, in principle, have to wait another 5-10 years - I think it will become clear then how our armored vehicles will develop and how it will eventually look.

[karabas-barabas]

Quote: Per se.

As an assault group, 6-man landing forces will dismount faster, will be ready for battle faster. The defeat of a machine with a smaller landing is less critical than with 9-10 infantry in the womb,

How many seconds can you dismount with a sixth faster than a nine? In my opinion slightly. But after all, the group still needs to scatter the weight of additional weapons and ammunition for it, and this is a mini UAV complex, then ATGMs, RPGs, machine guns and large-caliber rifles, communications equipment (which are not compact in the RA) and much more. And then the extra 3 fighters do not hurt.

Quote: Per se.

The best heavy infantry fighting vehicle is the tandem of the BMPT and heavy armored personnel carrier, the best infantry fighting vehicle is the BMP-3. A heavy infantry fighting vehicle, most likely stupidity, neither fish nor meat, an apparatus that loses the concept of a classic infantry fighting vehicle (maneuverability, versatility)

I do not quite agree that BMP3 is the best BMP. It may be the best among amphibious ones, but the protection of its aluminum armor against the mass of weapons used by modern NATO BMPs like CV90 or Puma leaves much to be desired. In my BMP3 too specialized car. In addition, the same Puma, in full body weight, weighs up to 45 tons, which allows it to hold RPGs from all sides, and this is due to passive armor, and no. Of course, the motor industry in Russia is far from being at the level that the Germans, or the Americans, have a lot of work to do in this direction, forever it will not work for Soviet developments, it is necessary to create a new one.

[Per se.]

Quote: karabas-barabas

I do not quite agree that the BMP3 is the best BMP.

The best, precisely, as the BMP in its classic sense of a highly maneuverable, universal machine. Compare the BMP-3 and the German "Puma" ... I will try to explain to you, I hope, not as "Pinocchio" ... Your doubting colleague Eugene (Albert1988), a supporter of the BMP T-15, I do not feel enthusiastic here. I will explain why. Firstly, the base itself of the T-14 tank, which was made a raw “platform”, not adopted for service. Secondly, if it is intended to release this push-push (tank and infantry fighting vehicle) on one UVZ, what will be the priority, a new tank or a heavy infantry fighting vehicle (plus other horror on a common basis) when it is necessary to saturate the troops with new tanks. Well, and thirdly, if T-14 was estimated at 400 millions, such a “platform” would simply be a “golden fish” that would ruin our budget, unless, of course, you see a noose around Russia, believing that our enemies some are bogemies, and our war is anti-terrorist operations, for which a compact army and “headset platforms” as anti-guerrilla, police equipment are enough. I have already said, the whole chip BMP in its universality, this is the whole essence of its concept. Heavy BMP ... For what? Next to tanks, as a specialized fire support, much more effective than BMPT. As a transport, for the second line, a much heavier BTR, which does not need reinforced weapons, devouring weight and volume, is much better. Eugene stubbornly does not want or can not understand. I do not want to call you "Karabas-Barabas", but I hope that you are different from this evil and silly character from a children's fairy tale. All the best.

[dvvv]

I agree with almost all of your statements! Tanks, BMPTs and armored personnel carriers, as a reasonable set, and BMP3s to capture bridgeheads and crossings when its use is justified. The entire platform of Armata is unknown and definitely expensive. How well its engine, transmission, equipment and electronics are not known. The T-90 in the best versions or the deeply modernized T-72, not the B3 version and its base for the BMPT, it's run-in, affordable. To make an experimental party of Armat and ride it well in exercises and see what kind of thing it is, not in a parade if, and then if there is money and desire does not fade ...

[just exp]

safety point of view BC must be separated from the infantry. so it’s possible to allocate a little more space in the rear of the tower (increase the tower by a certain amount, taking into account the dimensions of the Armata platform, even if it is increased by half a meter, this will not greatly affect the dimensions and the chance of the enemy getting into them)

[Scoun]

Quote: NEXUS

At the same time, so that the BK was tangible, to reduce the infantry compartment by a couple of places.

How do the ammunition and infantry compartments intersect?
Okay, there are already some who have sent Armata to Syria ... but you are NEXUS ?!
The Infantry Compartment is isolated from the BMPT and Tank turrets .... The turret is uninhabited!

[NEXUS]

Quote: Scoun

How do the ammunition and infantry compartments intersect?

With some modifications, why not? Here in the T-14 BC there is both in the tower and under it ... why the same principle is not applied in the T-15. The caliber is not 30 mm, but 57, which means you need more space, or cut the quantity of BC.

[alexmach]

But it is more universal. True, in the presence of small-caliber SDs, this may not be such a problem.

[CentDo]

Oh, everything is as always: the development is the best in the world at the moment, but they will see it in the military in 10 years. And when they see it, it may not be the best.

[St Petrov]

And when they see it, it may not be the best.

then now someone should be better

[CentDo]

So the fact of the matter is that we have too much a gap between development and delivery to the troops. For adversaries, this process takes less time. Not always, of course, but practically.

[Black5Raven]

Quote: CentDo

Too big gap between development and troop supply

And too small supplies.

[karabas-barabas]

Jewish Namer is an analogue of Almaty, and the platform has been tested by battles. There is a way and with a 30mm DUBMom, that is, in the BMP version.

[Sauron80]

It would be strange if a new model were developed that would be worse than the existing ones. But when she doesn’t just appear in the troops, and when all the armed forces are rearmament to her, then it’s possible to boast about who is better.

[karabas-barabas]

And what are you planning to shoot with this Needle?

[Sauron80]

Helicopters for example

[alstr]

It seems to me that you need to add to the module’s ammunition something like near-radius air defense (the same Igloo)

[just exp]

Cornet FM works on subsonic air targets. although yes, a needle would be preferable.
but on the lack of fish ....

[Gary zucker]

If set, then you need a separate combat module with air defense instead of a gun. And to put on a platoon one such machine, the rest with guns.

[karabas-barabas]

Why do you need a needle ?? Yes, and a special T-15 with a MANPADS module !? Why the hell are the Torahs and the Beeches needed then?

[karabas-barabas]

And what are you planning to shoot with this Needle?

[svp67]

Quote: karabas-barabas

Why do you need a needle ??

Quote: karabas-barabas

And what are you planning to shoot with this Needle?

Well, if you shoot down, it’s only something flying, in the form of an UAV or an enemy helicopter

Quote: karabas-barabas

Why the hell are the Torahs and the Beeches needed?

To work in areas and areas of responsibility. But they are not omnipotent and not all will be able to bring down. Especially if it is small and not quick.

[Vik66]

Put the tower with 152 mm. the cannon will be Merkava-4 - here you will have both the landing and the tank, all in one bottle ...

[zoolu350]

It doesn’t work out, the ammunition will “eat” the landing site, except to carry the landing on an articulated trailer.

[svp67]

Quote: Vik66

Put the tower with 152 mm. the gun will be "Merkava-4" -

No, it will be Armata - the first option. There could not solve many issues with armor protection and stabilization, when shooting and in motion to solve. No time for the holidays.

[Zaurbek]

T-15 is more necessary than T-14 itself .... Tanks and T-72-90 are quite imagined ....

[BAI]

The Bulletin of Mordovia has just submitted an article claiming that all Russian armored vehicles are vulnerable to the Javelins. How much is not a word about it here?
/https://topwar.ru/130304-ekspert-rossiyskie-tank
i-poka-bezzaschitny-pered-dzhavelinami.html /

[alexmach]

They say there is KAZ. Although it is not clear whether he can protect from above, although why would he be needed at all then

[karabas-barabas]

It can’t, KAZ Armata looks like a closed “Drozd” and protects it like 90 degrees to the left and right from the fluff .. at least it can be judged if you look at the pictures.

[svp67]

Quote: karabas-barabas

It can’t, KAZ Armata looks like a closed “Drozd” and protects it like 90 degrees to the left and right from the fluff .. at least it can be judged if you look at the pictures.

No, you're wrong. Since they did not understand the principles of work of KAZ "Afghanistan"

[dvvv]

There is a criterion such: cost-effectiveness, and then the question is: what is the combat effectiveness of this product? She is lucky 8 people landing, and what is the use of them? who knows what the tactics of foot soldiers when they jump out of an infantry fighting vehicle? Run behind this machine hiding behind, as shown in the reports or quickly look for a gap? And what will this infantryman do on the battlefield with a machine gun and grenade launcher? I strongly believe that military doctrine is built on the method of cutting dough by gunsmiths and this is the main thing. Tanks and BMPT

[CentDo]

Tanks and BMPTs are certainly fine, but they’ll burn them in the first village. And in the open field, a trained infantryman with an RPG can do a lot of things. It will be buried in the ground, and then it will sink into the side or into the stern. No BMPT will help, because the reaction time is much longer than that of an ordinary fighter with a gun.

[dvvv]

You argue like a horse breeder Budyonny before the war) Where can I get that trained infantryman? and he will not be soaked in the village? and in the winter it’s buried, but in Afghanistan it is well buried? And how is it in the mud? And RPG is in defense and not offensive, but in defense and BMPT will burst. Ran without fear of shelling with RPGs and a couple of grenades? They showed how the Chinese learn with the Russians and use their BMP, so they jumped and spanked in the puddles behind the BMP so that they wouldn’t be shot like that.

[CentDo]

Do you even read what they write to you? What is the offensive with an RPG? Who would suddenly kill an infantryman in the city? An RPG fighter is sitting in the house and does not shine, how do you find him? Telepathy? Or are you going to level all buildings with the ground? You the Terrible, at least remember the great strategist. Was there a lot of equipment there without infantry covering?

[just exp]

Well, your opponent and the nickname, as it were, stands for divanye_voyska.

[dvvv]

Quote: just EXPL

Well, your opponent and the nickname, as it were, stands for divanye_voyska.

You are surprisingly witty and insightful, but not armchairs, but armchairs, because I sit in an armchair and write to you. You, I believe, are a military officer, a real colonel, not a forum hacker! write while sitting in a shelter directly from Syria?

[dvvv]

Quote: CentDo

Do you even read what they write to you? What is the offensive with an RPG? Who would suddenly kill an infantryman in the city? An RPG fighter is sitting in the house and does not shine, how do you find him? Telepathy? Or are you going to level all buildings with the ground? You the Terrible, at least remember the great strategist. Was there a lot of equipment there without infantry covering?

So, we look at your writings and answer. As for the incident, it will burst and burn everyone, then not in the field, but in the city. But in Grozny there was no problem in a bad BMPT, but there was a problem in poor command and in the absence of those very trained and skilled cover fighters. Now carefully and on the topic: BMPT is adapted to fight against snipers and grenade launchers and generally against infantry is much better than tanks and at the same time has tank armor or is even better protected from RPGs. The Czechs didn’t have tandem grenades, as I recall, and when after Grozny the T-80 was specially fired at with shells, unlike the naked ones, the blockers drove into the city, then if I am not mistaken, the tank survived 8 RPG grenades without breaking. Moreover, it is easy to make BMPT with a huge amount of T-72, and the T-90 is not necessary there for nothing. This is a difference from the mythical and space-expensive Armata, which, perhaps, will never be done at all.

[CentDo]

So, the problem of the lack of trained cover fighters was acknowledged already well. But they themselves do not grow in the right place, they need to be delivered there, and it is advisable to do this on a normal BMP.
On grenades: that is, if in the 95th there were no tandem ones, then now they are not?
Well, according to BMPT: how will you control the balconies of the 3rd, 4th, 5th floors from the BMPT? And if you notice a protruding fighter, then you won’t even have time to visit. Or will he wait specially for your reaction before firing?
I’m not going to argue with you anymore, but I thank all the higher forces that our army is not under your command.

[dvvv]

you jumped)) Who prevents your fighters from running if they are? Do you know how to read and understand? The best that can be in the city is BMPT, and if there are fighters running, it’s very good. If this hateful BMPT is not for you, then why should they run? On the basis of Almaty will we wait for the BMP? Wait). But I would really like to be sent to run by a fighter near you))). but you think, try) The warriors are the most stupid choppers and it’s very difficult to twist them. Here in front of the Great Patriotic War horses tails offered to twist the masons and with drafts on tanks! BMPT based on the T-72, especially modified and run-in - very cheap and most effective support for infantry and tanks. and you don’t have to wait for other caliber 57, you need to use what is, mastered and run in! A voll of 5-6 shells of 30mm guns will disable any infantry fighting vehicle, albeit without penetration, but this is enough, and the tank too. I don’t know who commands the army, but I know for sure that there’s a mess there, as it usually was and now even more than before.

[karabas-barabas]

Quote: dvvv

as I recall, when after Grozny they specially fired at the T-80, hung in boxes, unlike those naked whose oak breakers drove into the city,

Rather, it’s myths, or solitary cases, that in general drove some kind of technique, bardaks, you know. Some crews manned by experienced officers kept their vehicles in order, and somewhere the conscripts gave the devil knows that they looked like a tank and sent to hell. And at the expense of 8 hits .., it was a demonstration of either the Omsk design bureau or UVZ, some sort of hinged bags, with DZ like, there is a video about this topic. They burned so many tanks because of the lack of care of the command, right up to the battalion commanders. Starting from the station, which, having occupied, instead of placing armored vehicles around the perimeter and occupying still empty houses around the station ..., the guys hardly parked their cars, muzzled against the wall and had fun. The Chechen detachment arrived were shocked and asked what to do .., well, Maskhadov ordered everything to be burned .. I know this from the words of one of that detachment, he says, but what could we do?

[Esoteric]

Quote: CentDo

No BMPT will help, because the reaction time is much longer than that of an ordinary fighter with a gun.

You would learn the materiel. Something like this will be:

[CentDo]

Well, how many tanks do we have equipped with the Arena? Does he protect the stern too, or is it only 270 degrees? And the upper hemisphere? And this is not to mention that no one experienced this complex in real combat, and no one knows how it will behave under strong shaking and under enemy fire. So learn the materiel yourself. And watch fewer videos from the "no analogs in the world" series.

[Alexey-74]

This is great of course, but when will we see her in the army? Until the T-15 gets there, it will need to be upgraded. Faster needed.

[Livonetc]

Nowhere on the net did I find information about the number of T-15s already built.
How many are already on the go?

[DenZ]

I think at the moment you will not find such information.

[Don]

From 6 to 12 units

[Aaron Zawi]

If ours finds the money to put on DUMER Dame, then there will be a comparable car.

[Esoteric]

Quote: Aron Zaavi

If ours find the money ...

You ask Kadyrov how he finds ... And then you do not have money? We all believed, right now, after the publication ...
By the way, who are you going to fight with? Maybe it's time to tie? It is necessary to agree, because a person’s language is not only to show ...

[RL]

Great article! Only two questions, "T-15 will become the most powerful BMP in the world," When "?
AND! Will your Western "partners" sleep?
I would like to work as a TV correspondent TV STAR, Lie and get paid

[MaxMelan]

Well, I’d like to put a tunguska-type zinette on an armata platform!

[Livonetc]

Quote: DenZ

I think at the moment you will not find such information.

Well.
So far, with confirmation, I counted 4 pieces. :)

[alexmach]

In the video from the victory parades?

[Esoteric]

Who will write here? If during the test they change the caliber of the gun, etc. nodes:

According to available data, at present, the specialists of the Uralvagonzavod corporation continue to test new vehicles based on the Armata platform, including the BMP T-15. Tests and improvements of the project should be completed within the next few years, after which an order for the construction of serial equipment may appear. The exact volumes of the future production of T-15 machines have not yet been determined, but preliminary plans have already been announced for the whole family. The current state armament program provides for the construction and transfer to the 2300 armed forces of armored vehicles based on the Armata platform. All these machines must be handed over to the customer before 2020. The exact number of tanks planned for construction, infantry fighting vehicles and other equipment of the family has not yet been specified.

[Sergey53]

For me, the 57mm AU-220M gun is just right. And the shells for it seem to be programmable already. And the range is good.

[alexmach]

There is nowhere to put them only in an uninhabited module.

[senima56]

That's when this car will be adopted and it will go into production .... then we will brag about the “best in the world”! In the meantime, it's all "projections"!

[Forever so]

will not. Uralvagonzavod bankrupt with terrible force. Indeed, in a military confrontation, you can go in two ways, you can develop new equipment, or you can kill the military industry of a competitor. And if the development of technology costs a lot, then to stop the plant it is enough to give an iPhone to anyone who needs it, or a pen with a naked man. So no T-15s. Privatization and sale of shares to American partners.

[Sergey53]

In our country, the government forces enterprises to take loans from private banks. It doesn’t give to enterprises, but only to banks. And the banks are investors \ Alfa-Bank or Alfa-Capital \, which lend them loans. Now, as if by law, they require a loan return with all the ensuing consequences. By the way, all these banks are offshore Cyprus.

[karabas-barabas]

Well, yes, but the management of UVZ is superprofessional, honest and dedicated people .. Who is driving there, including UVZ, is it not Chemezov? Billionaire and as if a friend of Putin ..

[Nasty]

MO position: while there is no big war, the old technology in bulk. It will do so. BTR-80, BMP-1, etc. )))

[Monarchist]

Quote: Per se.

Quote: NEXUS

At the same time, the question of BMPT Terminator on the basis of Almaty is very interesting.

How is it more interesting than BMPT based on T-90 or T-72? Probably nothing more than an ACS Coalition based on the T-90 and it’s on the “golden platform” from Armata, on the principle of “lyuborodo”, “lyubo” in the first case, on a reliable and inexpensive platform T- 90 ... If we talk about the T-15, then as a "police tank" for the Rosguards, it will come down, just like the "Boomerang". I hope time will show why it was necessary to create a “platform” on such an expensive and complicated base.

Let me disagree: for the Russian Guard, a "boomerang" is unnecessary. I agree that they now have to participate in the alterations, and then it will be cooler, but the militants of the armored vehicles do not even have a cool T15?

[Monarchist]

Quote: senima56

That's when this car will be adopted and it will go into production .... then we will brag about the “best in the world”! In the meantime, it's all "projections"!

They took it straight from the tongue: the car is not yet in service and has not yet gone into production, and the “silk-cops” already let’s scribble: “T15 is the most powerful BMP in the world”, like in a bazaar: “respectable public, visit us a year or so : Become the owner of a unique and prch
I do not understand this

[Asthma]

I was interested to see the self-propelled guns built on this platform. but we have not yet adopted the Coalition. sadness = (

[Nemesis]

It would be like that if they kept a 100 mm gun on it, because the main enemy of the BMP is infantry, and the rejection of 100 mm land mines is a bad idea

[karabas-barabas]

Modern 30mm programmable shells reach up to 3km with high accuracy and you can’t hide from them in the trench or in the building, they will reach and chop. A 30mm OPBS, for example from Puma, has an armor penetration of 11cm per 1 km, and 40mm has 14cm. In my opinion it is necessary to develop a modern 30mm BK for 2A42 and shove the fluff into a hard corset so that it does not vibrate.

[Nemesis]

Go to Donbass, there in a week you will understand the difference between 30 mm and 100 mm and no new shells can’t cancel the amount of explosives ... and the number of fragments too

[First iron-faced]

Bulletin of Mordovia, and what will be such a BMP?
- "Front" (2015) version of the BTR-T, no more. As far as Kurganets is, there are military comments on the height of the BMP silhouette, and here is also the length.

[karabas-barabas]

I doubt that the military complain about the high silhouette, because this is due to mine protection (I hope).

[Savignon]

When I see the phrase "Messenger of Mordovia" - I immediately close this squalor.