Military Review

Russian Armed Forces in March will receive a batch of 12 BMPT "Terminator"

96
It became known that the Russian military will soon receive a batch of combat support vehicles tanks (BMPT) "Terminator". Information Agency Interfax-AVN reports that the transfer of 12 units of this kind of equipment will be implemented in March of this year. It is known that the BMPT Terminator in 2018 for the first time will take part in the Victory Parade on Red Square.


The combat vehicle supporting the Terminator tanks, which will go to the troops, is made on T-90A tank units. "Terminator" is designed to defeat anti-tank weapons, including the process of suppressing enemy personnel, capable of using anti-tank systems and grenade launchers. BMPT "Terminator" can be used on enemy tanks, to conduct effective fire on protected stationary targets.

The BMPT armament complex creates a high-density fire and can attack up to 4's targets at the same time, including helicopters and low-flying aircraft.

Russian Armed Forces in March will receive a batch of 12 BMPT "Terminator"


Recall that the contract for the supply of a batch of upgraded versions of the Terminator BMPT to the RF Armed Forces was concluded in 2017.

The basic weapons of BMPT: 2 x 30-mm cannons, PKTM machine gun, Attack anti-tank missiles, and AGS-17 Flame.

Prototypes BMPT "Terminator" previously successfully passed all the necessary tests. The information obtained in their course helped the designers to identify and correct the deficiencies in the equipment of the machines.
Photos used:
MO RF
96 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Geisenberg
    Geisenberg 23 February 2018 12: 27
    +6
    And right away they were going to Syria for a run-in ... why was it trifling?
    1. RUSS
      RUSS 23 February 2018 12: 30
      +25
      Quote: Geisenberg
      And right away they were going to Syria for a run-in ... why was it trifling?

      The Russian tank support combat vehicle (BMPT) was tested in combat conditions in Syria. This was announced at a press conference as part of the Uraltank festival by the General Director - Chief Designer of JSC Ural Design Bureau of Transport Engineering, Andrei Terlikov.
      1. Geisenberg
        Geisenberg 23 February 2018 12: 33
        +1
        So now do not send something ??? ))) Decide who you are fighting for)
        1. JD1979
          JD1979 23 February 2018 13: 17
          +3
          Quote: Geisenberg
          So now do not send something ??? ))) Decide who you are fighting for)

          Every whim for your money. Well, or Assad, persuade the banquet to pay. Now it seems like the USSR is not and there are not so much money to send the latest equipment instead of delivering it to your troops right away. Tests are necessary and understandable, and everything else for thanks has already been full. Judging by the news, equipment is constantly moving there and so from warehouses, even if it’s not new, and it’s not newer to put up against it.
          1. Petr1
            Petr1 24 February 2018 07: 12
            0
            Quote: JD1979
            Now it seems like the USSR is not and there are not so many funds

            Forgive me, I do not agree with you, but now Russia has more money than the USSR, as a result of the ongoing GDP policy, the state completely stopped participating in the social life of its citizens, excluding handouts in the form of mat.capital and pensions, but even here it wants to give up his own.
            1. Prokhor80
              Prokhor80 24 February 2018 11: 46
              +1
              are there arguments - or is it just a blank bunch in the air?
              1. Petr1
                Petr1 24 February 2018 15: 38
                +1
                there is no doubt that you know how to count, in the USSR it was all-free, and now they pay for everything themselves, and they sell more oil than then ..
        2. NEXUS
          NEXUS 23 February 2018 13: 58
          +11
          Quote: Geisenberg
          So now do not send something ??? ))) Decide who you are fighting for)

          And the armored vehicles, especially the new one we already have is a consumable? Whose war is this in Syria? Or do you think that we should fight for Assad and the Syrians on earth?
          1. Geisenberg
            Geisenberg 23 February 2018 14: 27
            +1
            Quote: NEXUS
            Quote: Geisenberg
            So now do not send something ??? ))) Decide who you are fighting for)

            And the armored vehicles, especially the new one we already have is a consumable? Whose war is this in Syria? Or do you think that we should fight for Assad and the Syrians on earth?


            Fight for yourself. The Syrians will fight for themselves inshallah and with the help of the Russian Federation.
          2. Herman 4223
            Herman 4223 23 February 2018 20: 42
            0
            Technology in war is always a consumable, and only there you can check what it costs and what needs to be fixed in it, or how to distribute it better in the composition of the troops.
          3. Grigory_45
            Grigory_45 23 February 2018 21: 47
            +2
            Quote: NEXUS
            And the armored vehicles, especially the new one, is it a consumable? Whose war is this in Syria?

            judging by how you reacted to the relocation of the Su-57 to Syria, you should jump to the ceiling from such a proposal. And then it’s straightforward to break the template — a secret and newest, not yet adopted fighter — it is possible and even necessary, but “Terminators”, which are a hundred years old at lunch, are not allowed.
          4. Petr1
            Petr1 24 February 2018 07: 18
            0
            Quote: NEXUS
            Whose war is this in Syria? Or do you think that we should fight for Assad and the Syrians on earth?

            This is already our war, as you don’t understand, as well as in the Donbass. We can’t do anything, we’ve got a bandera on the outskirts! We’ll get igil in Afghanistan, Tajikistan, Uzbekistan
      2. Grigory_45
        Grigory_45 23 February 2018 21: 41
        0
        Quote: RUSS
        Russian tank support combat vehicle (BMPT) was tested in combat conditions in Syria

        MO ordered a very small batch. This suggests that it has not yet been decided on anything. There will be military tests, they will show. Including whether this machine is needed at all
    2. Thunderbolt
      Thunderbolt 23 February 2018 12: 31
      +23
      And immediately them to run into SyriaJust from there
      1. Romario_Argo
        Romario_Argo 24 February 2018 00: 17
        +1
        photomontage
        in a person through the measured length of the legs. + on the caterpillar the rubber "shoes" to the 3 rink and later retouched, but on the steering wheel there are none at all. behind BMPT there is a trace from the left track, but there is no right track.
    3. Vitaly Anisimov
      Vitaly Anisimov 23 February 2018 12: 33
      +2
      Quote: Geisenberg
      And right away they were going to Syria for a run-in ... why was it trifling?

      Straight from the tongue removed .. hi And water the devils ...! EVERYTHING will be decided there in Syria ... !!!!
      1. Geisenberg
        Geisenberg 23 February 2018 12: 35
        +2
        Quote: MIKHAN
        Quote: Geisenberg
        And right away they were going to Syria for a run-in ... why was it trifling?

        Straight from the tongue removed .. hi And water the devils ...! EVERYTHING will be decided there in Syria ... !!!!


        hi ... in Sartir))) as bequeathed to GDP at all times)))
      2. tol100v
        tol100v 23 February 2018 13: 30
        +3
        Quote: MIKHAN
        And water the devils ...! Everything will be decided there in Syria.

        Not only in Syria, here is the Olympics by the end, and the beginning of the next round of the North Korean theme, and in LNR the harnesses are tight! And all over the world there are sharp points, and not to count!
    4. Non liberoid Russian
      Non liberoid Russian 23 February 2018 12: 45
      +3
      have been there for a long time
    5. Piramidon
      Piramidon 23 February 2018 13: 42
      +7
      Quote: Geisenberg
      And right away they were going to Syria for a run-in ... why was it trifling?

      Late for advice. In MO, for some reason, they thought of it themselves.
      1. Geisenberg
        Geisenberg 23 February 2018 14: 28
        0
        Quote: Piramidon
        Quote: Geisenberg
        And right away they were going to Syria for a run-in ... why was it trifling?

        Late for advice. In MO, for some reason, they thought of it themselves.


        Where does the data that I give out tips ???
        1. Piramidon
          Piramidon 23 February 2018 14: 30
          +2
          Quote: Geisenberg
          Where does the data that I give out tips ???

          From your words. I quoted a quote.
          1. Geisenberg
            Geisenberg 23 February 2018 14: 34
            0
            Quote: Piramidon
            Quote: Geisenberg
            Where does the data that I give out tips ???

            From your words. I quoted a quote.


            I don’t remember giving advice ... Just in case, read the name of the section in which you saw my comment. It says "Comments." For those who are in the tank yelling at the barrel - I do not give advice.
    6. Prokhor80
      Prokhor80 24 February 2018 11: 48
      +1
      firstly, they have been tested there for a long time and, on the basis of their effectiveness, a party was ordered for the Moscow Region. secondly, I think this is already a modernized party. otherwise what is being tested in Syria, that is, terminators have long been manufactured in different configurations.
  2. Ratmir_Ryazan
    Ratmir_Ryazan 23 February 2018 12: 29
    +7
    All armored vehicles in Russia also need KAZ, and BMPT and tanks in the first place !!! Otherwise, losses and equipment and people !!!
    1. Per se.
      Per se. 23 February 2018 15: 42
      +2
      Quote: Ratmir_Ryazan
      All armored vehicles need KAZ
      The complex of active protection (KAZ) is a set consisting of detection means, a control system and a defeat system. When a projectile or ATGM flies up to a tank, it is detected using sensors or a radar system and special ammunition is fired, which by means of explosive force, debris or a cumulative jet damages or completely destroys the projectile or anti-tank missile.KAZ is necessary for tanks and BMPTs, for dismounting infantry from an armored troop-carrier or infantry fighting vehicle, KAZ is not so unequivocal, as it can even attack its own infantry when activated.
  3. Ural cossack
    Ural cossack 23 February 2018 12: 31
    +1
    It is a pity that they were not there before.
  4. Lenivets2
    Lenivets2 23 February 2018 12: 37
    +3
    "It became known that the Russian military will soon receive a batch of Terminator Tank Support Fighting Vehicles (BMPTs). Interfax-AVN news agency reports that the transfer of 12 units of this kind of equipment will be carried out in March this year. "

    This has already been repeatedly reported, including at VO.
    What's the news?

    "The basic armament of the BMPT: 30-mm gun ...."

    Two guns.

    "also ANS-17" Flame ""

    Maybe AG-17D?
    Two, by the way. hi
    1. RUSS
      RUSS 23 February 2018 12: 46
      +1
      Quote: Lenivets2
      What's the news?

      Since there is little news output, so you need to replenish the news feed on the site with at least something laughing
    2. seos
      seos 23 February 2018 12: 55
      +6
      The idea is good, but the choice of weapons sucks ...
      1) 30 mm guns 2 pcs. 1 cannon fires OF 2a fires BT shells - against whom?
      2) AGS are in the case and are term papers - there’s not much sense from them .... I can imagine how they shake on the go ... on the nose then ..
      The fact is that a modification that has passed state tests in the late 90s is accepted for service ... (no state tests - do not have the right to buy).
      Say, the installation of a BM Baikal with a 57 mm cannon + Ptur + AGS on the combat module would be a good alternative to the existing BMPT (if they can adapt the AGS and ATGM)
      In general, it would be ideal to develop a new tower combat module for the modernization of old tanks, the main gun 57mm + AGS 57 + machine gun ... would be a serious universal assault module.
      1. cariperpaint
        cariperpaint 23 February 2018 13: 42
        +4
        and 57 mm against whom? taking into account the size of its shells, there will be small bk, which also makes little sense. . God forbid to push there 50 shells ... and where is it? 57 mm piece is good but ...
      2. Lenivets2
        Lenivets2 23 February 2018 15: 25
        +2
        Are you this to me?
        And what does this have to do with my comment?
        Further on your comment: "30 mm guns 2 pcs. 1 gun fires OF 2a fires BT shells - against whom?"
        Against lightly armored vehicles and soldiers in shelters.
        Or do you think that OF is a panacea?
        "AGS are in the building and are term papers - there’s not much sense from them .... I can imagine how they shake on the go ... on the nose then .."
        This is what an optimist you need to be to shoot on the go!
        And from the stops, oddly enough, he doesn’t shake him.
        “Let's say installing a BM Baikal with a 57 mm cannon + Ptur + AGS on the combat module would be a good alternative to the existing BMPT (if they can adapt the AGS and ATGM)”
        And the "Death Star" does not need to cram?
        Well, there’s dofig’s place, the Iskander will fit in there.
        And there are so many ammunition in Baikal that they can’t be shot during the whole war (it was sarcasm, if not clear). laughing
      3. Genry
        Genry 23 February 2018 15: 29
        +1
        Quote: seos
        1) 30 mm guns 2 pcs. 1 cannon fires OF 2a fires BT shells - against whom?

        In settlements there are a lot of firing points behind walls, behind concrete fences .... An HE shell penetrates an obstacle and explodes behind it, destroying manpower. And such goals in our paragraph - the majority.
        Quote: seos
        2) AGS are in the case and are term papers - there’s not much sense from them .... I can imagine how they shake on the go ... on the nose then ..

        The body roll is the same everywhere ... Or does your nose swing more than feed?
        Quote: seos
        The fact is that a modification that has passed state tests in the late 90s is accepted for service ... (no state tests - do not have the right to buy).

        State tests, in fact, they were combined with the military - this stage is more important, in terms of the effectiveness of the weapon, and not its quality of production.
        Quote: seos
        Say, the installation of a BM Baikal with a 57 mm cannon + Ptur + AGS on the combat module would be a good alternative to the existing BMPT (if they can adapt the AGS and ATGM)

        The Baikal cannon has an incommensurable range with the AGS and therefore it makes no sense to combine these weapons.
        Quote: seos
        In general, it would be ideal to develop a new tower combat module for the modernization of old tanks, the main gun 57mm + AGS 57 + machine gun ... would be a serious universal assault module.

        And you do not know that instead of "Baikal" there is an "Epoch", with a shorter gun LShO-57 (https://topwar.ru/123372-boevoy-modul-epoha-s-no
        vym-kompleksom-vooruzheniya.html) which is more suitable for supporting infantry and eliminates the need for AGS.
        1. Grigory_45
          Grigory_45 23 February 2018 21: 57
          +1
          Quote: Genry
          there is an "Epoch", with a shorter gun LShO-57

          it’s not a gun at all, but a grenade launcher. His middle name is AGS-57
          1. Genry
            Genry 24 February 2018 19: 56
            0
            Quote: Gregory_45
            it’s not a gun at all, but a grenade launcher. His middle name is AGS-57

            Well of course, the barrel length in calibers is not a gun. But due to the short trunk, it allows you to quickly aim at the target and not get confused in trees or lampposts.
            AGS-57 has a shorter barrel, in vain you recall it here.
            1. Grigory_45
              Grigory_45 26 February 2018 10: 53
              0
              Quote: Genry
              AGS-57 has a shorter barrel

              I have never seen that AGS-57 and LShO-57 are different systems. Available sources indicate that they are one and the same weapon. Do you have other information? ..
              Quote: Genry
              quickly aim at the target and not get confused in trees or lampposts

              something like that, but the AGS (or low-ballistic gun) is still not a normal gun. It will not be able to effectively deal with armored vehicles (the flight speed of the ammunition is small, the aiming range is small). AGS is by no means a substitute for a cannon. See which garden was piled on the "Age" with him. Already two types of missiles .. "normal" ATGMs for fighting tanks and "underPTURs" for fighting light armor. In my opinion, wild savage turned out. If you need a grenade launcher - then something like a "Balkan" should be additionally screwed.
              1. Genry
                Genry 26 February 2018 13: 19
                0
                In addition to textual information, pay attention to the photo. And all errors are replicated, but no one is correcting.
      4. Per se.
        Per se. 23 February 2018 15: 31
        0
        Quote: seos
        The idea is good, but the choice of weapons sucks ...
        This is an opinion-cliché, one said without thinking, they began to repeat. What has been done optimally, 57 mm can and will be in any modifications, although there will be those for whom 57 mm will be "not enough" in the comments.
      5. Grigory_45
        Grigory_45 23 February 2018 21: 53
        0
        Quote: seos
        no state tests - do not have the right to buy

        MO can buy equipment with a letter of at least O1. This means that the product has not only passed the test, but also the documentation for it has been adjusted accordingly and accepted by the Customer.
        Quote: seos
        Here is the choice of weapons sucks.

        because there was nothing more at that time. Remember how old the car is ..
  5. Under the dome
    Under the dome 23 February 2018 12: 45
    +3
    good weapon powerful
    1. san4es
      san4es 23 February 2018 12: 55
      +4
      Quote: Under the dome
      good weapon powerful
      soldier
      1. Under the dome
        Under the dome 23 February 2018 13: 13
        0
        cool. how many people are there inside?
        1. Okolotochny
          Okolotochny 23 February 2018 14: 04
          +6
          In my opinion, the crew is 5 people.
          1. Under the dome
            Under the dome 23 February 2018 14: 07
            +1
            Ok thanks
        2. seti
          seti 23 February 2018 14: 45
          +2
          The crew is three people.
          1. Paranoid50
            Paranoid50 23 February 2018 15: 04
            +5
            Quote: seti
            The crew is three people.

            Three people have that based on the T-72. And the one that was purchased by the Ministry of Defense is based on the T-90A, the crew is five people.
            1. Per se.
              Per se. 23 February 2018 15: 17
              +1
              Quote: Paranoid50
              Three people have that based on the T-72. And the one that was purchased by the Ministry of Defense is based on the T-90A, the crew is five people.
              1. Paranoid50
                Paranoid50 23 February 2018 15: 38
                +5
                In general, some confusion with typology arose with BMPT. yes The one that "Terminator-2" is distinguished by a combat module (ATGM arrangement, additional reservations, etc.) There are also differences in the basic chassis - either T-72 or T-90. It resembles the confusion with the Jagdpanther, which was not shared by the "early" and "late", not considering the modification of the basic Panther chassis: ausf D, A, G. And in the end there are as many as five (or six) varieties of this self-propelled gun. A similar topic is with our BMPT. In a word, the main thing is not to get confused. yes
                1. Per se.
                  Per se. 23 February 2018 15: 58
                  +3
                  BMPT can be done either only on the T-90 or T-72 chassis, even the T-55 base will do. Above all, our "Guderians" would not be confused in what they needed, they would not pray for the old statutes. The BMPT could also become the leader of the 2-3 heavy BTR (on the same T-90 or T-72 chassis), forming a tandem in specialization (fire support, BMPT, protected transport, a heavy BTR), which is much more effective with the attempts from heavy BMP ", which will lose versatility and mobility, and in specialization will be inferior to BMPT in armament and protection, and heavy armored personnel carriers in cost, weight and dimensions. If you use the base T-90, it would be logical to bring to mind the "duplex" of BMPT and BMO-T type vehicles under the assault group.
                  1. Paranoid50
                    Paranoid50 23 February 2018 16: 11
                    +3
                    Quote: Per se.
                    which is much more effective than trying with a "heavy infantry fighting vehicle", which will lose versatility and mobility,

                    So, many leading manufacturers of similar equipment scratch turnips on it. We have to take into account, first of all, Wishlist customers, yeah. Yes, you don’t have to go far for an example - the British Ajax infantry fighting vehicle. The Britons themselves do not seem to know what they need. As a result, there are lines of similar special monsters. Well, these are their problems. You are right that
                    our "Guderians" would not get confused in what they needed, would not pray for the old charters.
                    1. Per se.
                      Per se. 23 February 2018 16: 27
                      +1
                      Quote: Paranoid50
                      The Britas do not seem to know what they need.
                      The Britons and the Yankees in their lives sit across the straits and oceans, plundering the whole world, like colonialists, in big wars, substituting others for themselves in the main bloody massacres. Their main tactics resulted in the expeditionary corps. We cannot be guided only by the experience of local wars or anti-terrorist operations in specific geographic regions (Afghanistan, Chechnya, Syria). If you dwell on action movies using partisan tactics, on explosions from land mines, during attacks of rear columns, you can produce fucking techniques that are not needed for a real war, ineffective in protecting Russia itself from external aggression. Those who trust in this only on nuclear weapons are hardly intelligent people ... Therefore, to summarize, the best BMP is our BMP-3 (BMD-4М) for marching throws and forcing water obstacles along the way. In heavy performance, when using a tank base, the best solution seems to be a tandem of BMPT (specialized fire support from your tanks and infantry) and a heavy BTR for the second line (armored vehicle function) for assault groups. "Heavy BMP", if needed, then mainly as a "police tank," a special forces vehicle against terrorists.
                      1. Paranoid50
                        Paranoid50 23 February 2018 16: 45
                        +3
                        Quote: Per se.
                        Therefore, to summarize, the best BMP is our BMP-3 (BMD-4M), for marching throws and forcing water barriers on the move. In heavy execution, when using a tank base, the tandem of BMPT (specialized fire support for sweeping tanks and infantry) and a heavy armored personnel carrier are seen as the best solution

                        No questions, definitely. hi
                2. Grigory_45
                  Grigory_45 23 February 2018 22: 00
                  +1
                  Quote: Paranoid50
                  The one that "Terminator 2", different combat module

                  The combat modules of the “Terminators” are the same. That is why many took the car to Khmeimim for the 2nd Terminator (BMPT-72), looking at the armor of the ATGM pipes. Booking launchers was a requirement of the MO. Differences in machines only in chassis, module unified
            2. seti
              seti 23 February 2018 15: 44
              0
              Do you really think that the export option will have 3 people and 5 for yourself? Hardly.
              1. Paranoid50
                Paranoid50 23 February 2018 16: 15
                +2
                Quote: seti
                the export option will have 3 people in staff and 5 for itself?

                Duc, already has: Kazakhs BMPT based on T-72. And for myself, my beloved, we decided to take the base of the "ninetieth" (if infa accurate). Frankly, he himself was somewhat surprised by this choice. request
                1. Grigory_45
                  Grigory_45 23 February 2018 22: 06
                  +1
                  Quote: Paranoid50
                  Duc, already has: Kazakhs BMPT based on T-72

                  Kazakhs have exactly the same "Object 199", which was ordered by the Russian Ministry of Defense. With a crew of five.
                  In the photo: BMPT at a military parade in Astana on May 7, 2015
                  1. Paranoid50
                    Paranoid50 23 February 2018 23: 37
                    +1
                    Quote: Gregory_45
                    BMPT at the military parade in Astana on May 7, 2015

                    Thank you.hi I’m saying that the main thing here is not to get confused. laughing And here is a photo of 2017:
                    Where did the Kazakhs share two more?request
                    1. Okolotochny
                      Okolotochny 24 February 2018 15: 00
                      +4
                      2nd manage AGSami. Maybe they were not in full dress.
                    2. Okolotochny
                      Okolotochny 24 February 2018 15: 05
                      +4
                      Do you know why 3? Take a closer look at the photo, like there are no AGSs on the sides, they are in front of your photo, because there are 5, and you have 3.
                      1. Paranoid50
                        Paranoid50 24 February 2018 16: 51
                        +1
                        Quote: Okolotochny
                        like there are no AGSs on the sides,

                        There is, in place. They don't seem to be on this:
              2. Okolotochny
                Okolotochny 24 February 2018 15: 03
                +5
                A colleague, two more people are operators (shooters) of AGSs. So 5.
          2. Okolotochny
            Okolotochny 24 February 2018 14: 59
            +5
            3 people, this is without course AGS.
        3. Per se.
          Per se. 23 February 2018 15: 26
          0
          Quote: Under the dome
          cool.
          What prevents the IDF from making BMPT based on Merkava or Namer? Get a powerful machine specialized fire support of their tanks and infantry.
          1. Grigory_45
            Grigory_45 23 February 2018 22: 12
            +1
            Quote: Per se.
            What prevents the IDF from doing BMPT based on the Merkava or Namer?

            do. In the photo - "Intent" with an uninhabited BM with a 30-mm gun.

            In principle, the logical decision is to put an uninhabited BM on a heavy armored personnel carrier. Space inside will not decrease, only the price will increase. Only ... do they need such a car? Israelis are quite happy with an armored personnel carrier with a 40 mm AGS and a machine gun
            1. Per se.
              Per se. 24 February 2018 18: 36
              0
              Quote: Gregory_45
              Only .. do they need such a car?
              In any case, they showed interest in our BMPT. The fact that they put a tower on the “Timer”, so, rather, it’s again that they have a heavy BMP. Why, they themselves Merkava essentially tank-heavy infantry fighting vehicles, so how can take paratroopers, though not very much. For the specifics of Israel, against the same Hamas, come down. If, however, do exactly BMPT, then it should be focused on a specialized fire function, plus enhanced protection. This will allow you to act alongside the tanks, or even ahead of them. This is the whole chip BMPT, which does not surpass any heaped "heavy BMP." Why, I explained it above. If the Israelis decide to do BMPT, and not a heavy BMP, it should be a Merkava with a powerful specialized infantry module, without the function of an armored personnel carrier, all reinforcement for defense and specialized weapons. Somehow, especially since the IDF did not even have the desire to send their heavy armored personnel carriers near or instead of tanks (and rightly so).
  6. NKT
    NKT 23 February 2018 12: 48
    0
    And what kind of organization will they be? Platoon for each TB or company for TB?
  7. Kars
    Kars 23 February 2018 12: 51
    +5
    Everything seems to be nice. But the placement of the pturs is still not very good. It does not seem that the protection will withstand the fire of 12,7 machine guns or an anti-material sniper rifle.
    1. Thunderbolt
      Thunderbolt 23 February 2018 13: 25
      0
      Petr will be shot at the approach to urban development and further only with guns in the "dead zone" of the upper floors as the main one.
      1. Kars
        Kars 23 February 2018 14: 16
        +3
        Pturs is still not a cheap thing. There can be many accidents. Including the appearance of an armored target in urban areas
        1. Per se.
          Per se. 23 February 2018 15: 22
          0
          ATGMs can be protected with a U-shaped screen (such as the Germans were on the T-IV), or use what they did on the basis of the T-72 (2 Terminator). Finally, anti-tank guerrillas in general can be abandoned against terrorist fighters (“partisans”).
          1. Thunderbolt
            Thunderbolt 23 February 2018 16: 06
            0
            Quote: Kars
            there can be many accidents. including the appearance of an armored target in urban development

            I agree, but the main task is to still support (cover) the tanks. And for the sudden appearance of enemy tanks, let the attached infantry advance with its portable "economy."
            P.S. I think that if it is critical to have exactly the reserved missiles, then this can be done in a subsequent modernization, because the turret rotation drives of the tower are uniquely designed for more weight without losing the reaction speed to the target.
  8. Esoteric
    Esoteric 23 February 2018 13: 02
    +4
    ... BMPT "Terminator" in 2018 for the first time will take part in the Victory Parade on Red Square


    Spending annually on the parade 1 budget money is extremely unwise. Military parades can and should be held to coincide with round dates. Forgive me, but annually rattling with a weapon that does not shoot, missiles that do not destroy anyone, exhausting people whose plan is to keep the lines and be ready to act on orders ... request It is time to start saving our resources, because the ceremonial hype is not always good. And for the freshness of memories, a "procession of the immortal regiment", laying flowers on the graves of soldiers and putting in order the burial places is enough.
    But you, sofa marshals, should be aware of such a thing that I don’t even dare to oppose my “meager reflections” ... Like that:
    Mind does not understand Russia,
    No yardstick to measure:
    She has a special
    You can only believe in Russia.

    Only this is about Russia, and not about the Kremlin tops, who no longer know how to appease their people, requiring bread and circuses. The truth is that both require different things in different places ... request
    1. Sergej1972
      Sergej1972 23 February 2018 14: 06
      +3
      And I like the parades. Only, unlike many commentators, on the contrary, I believe that this should be precisely a parade of military equipment in the first place. And the passage of the foot columns must be minimized.
  9. K-50
    K-50 23 February 2018 13: 31
    +3
    Mala is still a 30 mm gun, albeit two. You need to put 57 mm, then it turns out a killer version against all BMPs / armored personnel carriers, in which the armor is just for 30 mm ammunition and is designed for.
    1. NKT
      NKT 23 February 2018 13: 46
      +2
      The ammunition then will be small ....
    2. Grigory_45
      Grigory_45 23 February 2018 22: 14
      0
      Quote: K-50
      Mala is still a 30 mm gun, albeit two. Need to

      need to set 40 mm. And the BK is big, and the gun is powerful
  10. armourer
    armourer 23 February 2018 15: 00
    +1
    BRAVO!!! Decent car
    1. rocket757
      rocket757 23 February 2018 15: 46
      +2
      There is never too much firepower on the battlefield, NEVER!
  11. Sancho_SP
    Sancho_SP 23 February 2018 15: 50
    0
    The dubious value of this car now. 20-25 years ago - yes, of course.

    Today, a promising vehicle of this class is the T-14 BMP, which is similar in terms of security and armament, but also a BMP.
  12. Doliva63
    Doliva63 23 February 2018 16: 01
    +3
    Interestingly, they will be introduced to the PT division, they will be scattered over the PT platoons or given to the Cossacks? what Or maybe in TB SMEs instead of a fourth tank in every TV? recourse And where can I read about their place in battle formations? In the current BUSV they are not.
    1. Grigory_45
      Grigory_45 23 February 2018 22: 15
      +1
      Quote: Doliva63
      Interestingly, they will be introduced to the PT division, they will be scattered over the PT platoons or given to the Cossacks? Or maybe in TB SMEs instead of a fourth tank in every TV? And where can I read about their place in battle formations? In the current BUSV they are not.

      probably this was the reason the MO bought a batch of cars in order to determine their place in the process of military tests
      1. Doliva63
        Doliva63 24 February 2018 18: 51
        +3
        It's funny wink That is, let's buy, and there it will be seen laughing
        And if I don’t find where to attach it, the plant will return the money? lol
        1. Grigory_45
          Grigory_45 26 February 2018 10: 42
          0
          Quote: Doliva63
          It's funny That is, let's buy, and there it will be seen

          no other logical explanation is yet to be seen. Moscow Region did not share how it intends to use these machines, where to include it and to whom it should be subordinated. Moreover, the batch is one-time (unlike other equipment - the contracts are there for 2019/20. Unless for military tests, I don’t see anything else. Just as we bought the installation batch of BTR-90, and they disappeared somewhere in the vastness of Russia The party was there, they drove a car, and they didn’t buy them anymore and aren’t going to buy it. We don’t even hear about it.
  13. TOR2
    TOR2 23 February 2018 18: 21
    0
    Such a machine just needs good “eyes and ears”, both in the article and in the discussions, attention is paid to armaments, and the means of detection are somehow bypassed. An optics detector and an IR sight with a good detection range for such a machine will be very useful. Otherwise, any powerful weapons will be ineffective.
    1. Grigory_45
      Grigory_45 23 February 2018 22: 20
      +2
      Quote: TOR2
      Such a machine just needs good "eyes and ears"

      this is necessary for any armored vehicles, since this is a long-standing and still not outdated flaw - the extremely low situational awareness of the crews of armored vehicles. Not a damn thing is visible from them. In addition to cameras and other things, a high-quality connection with a UAV is necessary (receiving real-time pictures from it is much better visible from above), as well as with your infantry (up to the squad leader)
  14. Vadim851
    Vadim851 23 February 2018 20: 00
    +1
    The car is excellent, has long been needed. In terms of armament, 57 mm looked much more preferable, especially since this machine is in the same order as the tanks. In addition, in a probable opponent, 40mm on an infantry fighting vehicle is already becoming the norm, and even on some samples it is larger.
    Also, the 57 mm projectile has a much greater high-explosive radius, and also more effectively hits the enemy behind walls, fortifications, etc. Yes, BC will decrease much, compared to 30mm, but the effectiveness of fire will increase and fewer shells will go into milk
  15. glavnykarapuz
    glavnykarapuz 23 February 2018 21: 00
    0
    And our designers of "unparalleled analogues" did not master the selective power supply for the 30 mm gun?
    So stupidly they left the 2nd gun instead of increasing the BC ...
    It looks at the gaze of a delighted teenager or an unassuming layman, and maybe "cool", but practicality is clearly in doubt. About this there were already critical articles on the site and there is some grain of truth in them.
    1. Maz
      Maz 23 February 2018 22: 09
      0
      In one gun, high-explosive shells, in another gun armor-piercing incendiary. To instantly change the type of ammunition when shooting at various targets. Cheaper, more reliable, tested, breaks less often and no need to invent a selective bicycle ... build production ...
      1. glavnykarapuz
        glavnykarapuz 24 February 2018 01: 16
        0
        Quote: Maz
        In one gun, high-explosive shells, in another gun armor-piercing incendiary. To instantly change the type of ammunition when shooting at various targets. Cheaper, more reliable, tested, breaks less often and no need to invent a selective bicycle ... build production ...

        Is it from the armor-piercing incendiary which "were instantly changed by the type of ammunition"?
        OFS is understandable from any live walking force at a distance of effective fire will be.
        And what exactly 30 mm armor-piercing incendiary can hit in the current realities?
        lightly armored and unarmored wheeled vehicles (such as hummers) will easily damage / destroy conventional OFS, and the armor of many modern armored personnel carriers / armored personnel carriers is designed to withstand armor-piercing 30 mm.
        Do you really need a 2nd gun and even the selectivity of a single one? And the advantage of the second option is only in a large bookmaker (although this is also important).
        Maybe there is a reason in those thoughts that 57 mm is more relevant. Moreover, such modules have already been worked out. And these systems are more powerful than 2 x 30 mm in all respects, except for the total number of b / c (and leveled greater efficiency).
      2. Grigory_45
        Grigory_45 26 February 2018 10: 45
        +1
        Quote: Maz
        no need to reinvent the selective bicycle ... build production

        gun 2A42 itself has selective power... On the BMP-2, on which it is installed, for example, two ammunition boxes - one under the OFS, the second under the BZT. On the "Terminator" for some reason (I suppose, because of the layout features), selective power was not implemented
      3. Haye
        Haye 1 March 2018 01: 01
        0
        Silly, look at spec 2A42
  16. MOSKVITYANIN
    MOSKVITYANIN 24 February 2018 12: 19
    0
    Russian Armed Forces in March will receive a batch of 12 BMPT "Terminator"

    Apparently the company as part of TB, maybe the number of tanks in the tank company will be brought to the same number as the empirialists ....
  17. k_ply
    k_ply 24 February 2018 20: 16
    +1
    Presumably 9 out of 12 in the TB support company (platoon attached to the TR), 3 training crews for training (including reserve).
    Those. based on the abbreviation BMPT and the level of armor. the vehicles will operate in the same battle formations with tanks (every fourth BM). Here is the disadvantage of the "Terminator (-1)", like the MBT, except for the vulnerability of optoelectronic equipment from small arms fire and shrapnel - unprotected ATGM TPK.
  18. Okolotochny
    Okolotochny 24 February 2018 20: 49
    +4
    Paranoid50,
    On the second front photo there are places for them, but they themselves are not, IMHO.
  19. Radikal
    Radikal 24 February 2018 22: 23
    +1
    Quote: JD1979
    Quote: Geisenberg
    So now do not send something ??? ))) Decide who you are fighting for)

    Every whim for your money. Well, or Assad, persuade the banquet to pay. Now it seems like the USSR is not and there are not so much money to send the latest equipment instead of delivering it to your troops right away. Tests are necessary and understandable, and everything else for thanks has already been full. Judging by the news, equipment is constantly moving there and so from warehouses, even if it’s not new, and it’s not newer to put up against it.

    What makes you think that the latest technology does not go abroad? How many T-90s have been delivered abroad? 3-4 tank armies - no less! And the planes, warships, air defense systems? So you have too good an opinion on this topic! sad
  20. Hiller
    Hiller 25 February 2018 20: 35
    +1
    The car is serious, but where are they going to register it? Not when there are 12 of them, but in a serious way and including BUSV ??))))