Military Review

A new generation of armored personnel carriers K-16 based on the platform "Boomerang" came to the preliminary tests

111
The armored carrier of the new generation based on the unified wheeled armored platform "Boomerang" will be radically different from the current machines of this type, said Alexander Krasovitsky, General Director of Military Industrial Company ("MIC"), in an interview with Interfax.


A new generation of armored personnel carriers K-16 based on the platform "Boomerang" came to the preliminary tests


The new generation armored personnel carrier is the K-16 armored personnel carrier based on the Boomerang unified platform. Now he is at the stage of preliminary tests.
- said A. Krasovitsky.

He noted that the K-16 is fundamentally different from the current BTR-82A and BTR-90. Their only similar feature is the 8 x 8 wheel formula.

Everything else is fundamentally different - the layout with the front location of the power plant, the troop compartment in the stern and the landing of the assault on the stern, modular reservation, a high level of mine and ballistic protection, digital board, situational awareness system, on-board information management system and much more. I will say this: no one has done this before in our country, and many systems have no analogues and abroad
- A.Krasovitsky declared.
Photos used:
http://www.rusarmy.com/
111 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Grigory_45
    Grigory_45 17 March 2018 14: 19
    +28
    I will say this: before us in our country, no one has done this before

    there is some truth in these words, but
    have no analogues and abroad too
    - Causes a smile. Than at least the German “Boxer” is not an analogue? Or the Finnish Patria? Or South African Mbombe 8?
    1. Serge Gorely
      Serge Gorely 17 March 2018 14: 20
      +3
      Quote: Gregory_45
      I will say this: before us in our country, no one has done this before

      there is some truth in these words, but
      have no analogues and abroad too
      - Causes a smile. Than at least the German “Boxer” is not an analogue? Or the Finnish Patria? Or South African Mbombe 8?

      That is, nothing new needs to be done, if there are analogues, no?
      1. Grigory_45
        Grigory_45 17 March 2018 14: 29
        +27
        Quote: Serge Gorely
        That is, nothing new needs to be done, if there are analogues, no?

        it’s not necessary to say that “analogue has”
        1. vorobey
          vorobey 17 March 2018 14: 36
          +17
          Quote: Gregory_45
          Quote: Serge Gorely
          That is, nothing new needs to be done, if there are analogues, no?

          it’s not necessary to say that “analogue has”


          And you are probably aware of the entire filling .... specialists are children compared to you ... or they, unlike you, do not study analogues and cannot judge what is in the world and what is not yet ... your words cause a smile .. .
          1. Grigory_45
            Grigory_45 17 March 2018 14: 40
            +9
            Quote: vorobey
            And you are probably aware of the entire filling

            all, not all, but partially up to date. Do you know anything to be able to argue with me with reason? If there are no arguments, then all the best
            1. vorobey
              vorobey 17 March 2018 14: 44
              +6
              Quote: Gregory_45
              not all, but partially in the know


              very good .. the mine defense system which is used on the same patria and on 16. starting from the form of the armored hull. suspension protection and crew accommodation.? ..
              1. Grigory_45
                Grigory_45 17 March 2018 14: 49
                +6
                Quote: vorobey
                mine protection system
                but her better look at Mbombe 8
                I will not even comment on the rest. According to the writing style and the beginning of the debate, I have the opinion that you know very little about these machines. By the way, we have never been in the forefront of creating MRAP, this is a fairly new direction for us. South African people ate a lot. They have been working for more than a dozen years. By the way, Mbombe 8 does not have a traditional V-shaped bottom. because of which you have to lift the overall height of the car. So alas, there is no advanced in this area in Boomerang.
                1. vorobey
                  vorobey 17 March 2018 15: 05
                  +6
                  Quote: Gregory_45
                  By the way, we have never been in the forefront of creating MRAP, this is a fairly new direction for us.


                  Here you are right, Gregory, but as for the infantry escort vehicles on the battlefield, we were the first here .. and returning to the Boomerang wheeled platform, these are two full-fledged units on the same base of BMP and BTR. By the way, your reference to Mbombe 8. And what complete information is there about it? fragmentary information ... and today only an uninhabited module with a machine gun installation is only possible.

                  Apparently, you yourself are not familiar with these machines beyond pictures and theories ..
                  1. Grigory_45
                    Grigory_45 17 March 2018 15: 22
                    +14
                    Quote: vorobey
                    Apparently you yourself beyond the pictures and theories are not familiar with these machines

                    here you are right too. Alas, the cougar and the South African car were seen only in pictures. But the pictures are different for the pictures) The cougar was scratching their hands to make out and get to know better, if it were possible. But Kurganets and Armata happened alive, not only from the outside. Anticipating the question - they say, Boomerang is another - I must say right away that the machines are very, very unified. The same co-executors of the OCD components. There are interesting solutions, there is something that has never been seen before in mass-produced domestic cars. But to call something unparalleled - my language does not turn around. By the way, he does not turn around among self-respecting designers. Only with journalists
                    1. vorobey
                      vorobey 17 March 2018 16: 00
                      +3
                      Quote: Gregory_45
                      Alas, the cougar and the South African car were seen only in pictures. But the pictures are different for the pictures) The cougar was scratching their hands to make out and get to know better, if it were possible.


                      Quote: Gregory_45
                      But Kurganets and Armata happened alive, not only from the outside.


                      Quote: Gregory_45
                      But to call something unparalleled - my language does not turn around.


                      I'm just interested in the logic of Gregory .. if you saw only one thing .. how can you compare ...

                      I haven’t been dealing with armored vehicles for a long time .. but such reckless and sometimes self-assertive statements like yours just cling to me ... I have nothing against you .. I am interested to know more. but not so .. cussing my admiration for something .. at one time I studied the works of the German learned balistic scholar, including his works on the basis of the Persian Gulf war and Iraq. He also admitted that our defense systems are better, so the Americans and Germans showed such interest in buying developments both ours and Ukrainian .. I mean that the analogue is different. as the saying goes, the devil is in the details .. and now the details may have no analogues .. I hope we understand each other ... by the way the tank is on the author .. did that end or unrequited love? hi
                      1. Grigory_45
                        Grigory_45 17 March 2018 16: 18
                        +6
                        Quote: vorobey
                        I'm just interested in the logic of Gregory .. if you saw only one thing .. how can you compare ...

                        It seems like he answered your question. Pictures differ. And if with explanations, then they acquire a completely different meaning. For one, of course, for whom it’s not just pictures.
                        Quote: vorobey
                        crap his admiration for something

                        take the trouble to cite my quote, where indicated. Your speculations are of no interest to anyone, and I’ll ask you to keep them with you. Waiting for a quote. You have to answer for the words, right?
                        Quote: vorobey
                        I once studied the works of the German scholarly balistic scholar

                        you see - and you studied the works. And we studied bourgeois technology. Knowing the enemy’s materiel is just as important as your own. So as not to repeat other people's mistakes and borrow sound ideas to one degree or another.
                        Quote: vorobey
                        I hope we understand each other

                        You see what’s the matter. You didn’t understand me. Are you indignant at my disrespectful attitude to our technology? So, firstly, he was not there, and secondly, he had seen enough of something, and was no longer a curiosity. Tired. And the irony in me is caused by the words of all sorts of managers about "having no analogues." Not about the technique itself, but about the words. It would be someone else to listen to - the gender designer is just a manager, albeit a high one. He is not even a constructor. By the way, in the issue of "Military Acceptance" dedicated to Boomerang, this handsome man generally said an epic thing - "the diameter of the barrel of the gun." A technically competent specialist will never say that. Actually, after such statements I’m no longer outraged, but simply ironic over them)
                    2. SERGUS
                      SERGUS 17 March 2018 16: 31
                      0
                      Quote: Gregory_45
                      Anticipating the question - they say, Boomerang is another - I must say right away that the machines are very, very unified. The same co-executors of the OCD components.

                      By the way, the same thing was said in the program "military acceptance" which was dedicated to boomerang.
                2. the most important
                  the most important 17 March 2018 18: 40
                  +1
                  Quote: Gregory_45
                  So alas, there is no advanced in this area in Boomerang.

                  I agree with you in many ways. An unimaginably huge bus ... Why? Why are armored personnel carriers needed at all? It is much more economical to have a wheeled infantry fighting vehicle, it has much more problems to solve. V-shaped body is also not a panacea for mines. For me, it would be much more reliable to develop a wheeled infantry fighting vehicle from the BTR-90. Strengthen armor protection, combat module "Bahcha" + grenade launcher + 4PTUR. Great car for the southern LDP. Speed, power, most of all, for fast raids on the roads of Europe and the deserts of BV.
                3. Setrac
                  Setrac 17 March 2018 19: 03
                  +3
                  Quote: Gregory_45
                  By the way, we have never been in the forefront of creating MRAP

                  MRAP is an APC for the poor.
                  1. Grigory_45
                    Grigory_45 18 March 2018 12: 41
                    +2
                    Quote: Setrac
                    Mrap is an APC for the poor

                    Good "APC for the poor," which is more expensive than the traditional APC. Apparently, these are some special beggars laughing
                    1. Setrac
                      Setrac 18 March 2018 21: 46
                      +2
                      Quote: Gregory_45
                      Good "APC for the poor," which is more expensive than the traditional APC. Apparently, these are some special beggars

                      These are their problems, not ours. In fact, MRI is an ersatz armored personnel carrier for those who do not have normal armored personnel carriers.
                      1. Grigory_45
                        Grigory_45 19 March 2018 16: 50
                        +1
                        Quote: Setrac
                        In fact, MRAP is an ersatz armored personnel carrier

                        It depends on what exactly you mean by the term MRAP. Probably. trucks hastily podshamanany by followers of the grinder and the welding machine from improvised materials? Surprisingly, the most common armored personnel carrier with a crew protection system from undermining will also be an MRAP. Like, for example, Boomerang or the same South African Mbombé. Not every MRAP in the full sense of an armored personnel carrier (it can be an armored car), not every armored personnel carrier is an MRAP
                  2. The comment was deleted.
                4. k_ply
                  k_ply 18 March 2018 16: 33
                  +3
                  Quote: Gregory_45
                  By the way, there is no traditional V-shaped bottom on Mbombe 8 ...

                  Why not? If the so-called an armored protector that protects the undercarriage of the car in the frontal plane and closes the view, this does not mean that there is no V-shaped bottom.

                  Quote: Gregory_45
                  ... there is no traditional V-shaped bottom. because of which you have to lift the overall height of the car.

                  Apparently in your understanding a V-tip is necessary. Bullied to increase clearance, high clearance also contributes to the mine stability of the bottom of the hull (from anti-bottom cumulative mines, for example).
                  1. Grigory_45
                    Grigory_45 18 March 2018 18: 26
                    +2
                    Quote: k_ply
                    Quote: Gregory_45
                    By the way, there is no traditional V-shaped bottom on Mbombe 8 ...
                    Why not?

                    Because no) The flat bottom of the Mbombé is one of the know-how of the car. However, the manufacturer stated and confirmed mine resistance in class 4b according to STANAG 4569 - 10 kg of TNT under the wheel or underbody. Not an outstanding result, but quite worthy.
                    Quote: k_ply
                    Apparently in your understanding, the V-tip is necessary

                    Apparently, you are one of those who also lives on speculation? Where did I say that? I just said the opposite - that Mbamba does not have it, although it is MRAP. You are either blind, or you are not trained to read, or .. you really don’t want to think really bad. Most likely, spaced armor plates with a cellular energy-absorbing filler are most likely used.
                    Quote: k_ply
                    Bullseye to increase clearance

                    Do you know what clearance is? This is the distance between the abutment surface and the lowest point on the center of the vehicle. Cars with the same clearance, but one with a V-shaped bottom, and the second with a flat, will have a different overall height. Flat bottom will be lower, all other things being equal.
                    Quote: k_ply
                    high clearance also contributes to the mine resistance of the bottom of the hull (from anti-bottom cumulative mines, for example)

                    what a horror) Everything is simpler: the energy of the shock wave decreases proportionally cube of distance. The farther the bottom from the surface of the earth (the epicenter of the explosion) - the less destructive the shock wave will have on it. For the same purpose, a V-shaped bottom is made to deflect the shock wave to the side - so that it either goes into the void, or wastes energy on breaking the wheels, for example, and not on the deformation of the bottom and does not ruin those inside the armored capsule.
                    1. The comment was deleted.
                      1. The comment was deleted.
                    2. The comment was deleted.
        2. Setrac
          Setrac 17 March 2018 19: 01
          +1
          Quote: Gregory_45
          it’s not necessary to say that “analogue has

          In the world there are many different equipment that has no analogues in the world.
        3. Zilibob
          Zilibob 17 March 2018 20: 44
          +1
          Well, as it’s not necessary, such is the party’s policy, if they do something, it is surely unparalleled, otherwise people don’t want to, otherwise there will be exclamations: “Why spend money!”, And so on. People are happy.
      2. Shura Sailors
        Shura Sailors 17 March 2018 14: 33
        +8
        The new is always new (in the country, in the region, in the family, in itself). This is another opportunity to develop, grow, find new opportunities and solutions. What's bad about it?
        'Having no analogues in the world' is an amorphous thing (for example, as a person and person, I also have no analogues in the world, but this does not mean my exceptionalism). Everything is relative
        1. Dreamboat
          Dreamboat 17 March 2018 19: 07
          0
          If this is really a development, and not a copy, then in something, in individual design solutions, it has no analogues. And to say that machines with the formula 8x8 or V shaped bottom were before the lot of trolls!
    2. x.andvlad
      x.andvlad 17 March 2018 14: 24
      +4
      Quote: Gregory_45
      have no analogues and abroad too
      - Causes a smile.

      Quote is not complete: and many systems have no analogues and abroad too
      It will be closer to the truth. That is, we take as a basis something advanced abroad and improve it with our “systems”. It is a pity that there is no specifics.
      1. Grigory_45
        Grigory_45 17 March 2018 14: 31
        +10
        Quote: x.andvlad
        and many systems have no analogues and abroad too

        stubbornly did not notice anything in Boomerang that would not have a place on foreign cars. Did you install a photonic engine, or super-armor? There is nothing special there (by modern standards)
        1. vorobey
          vorobey 17 March 2018 14: 36
          +5
          Quote: Gregory_45
          Quote: x.andvlad
          and many systems have no analogues and abroad too

          stubbornly did not notice anything in Boomerang that would not have a place on foreign cars. Did you install a photonic engine, or super-armor? There is nothing special there (by modern standards)


          once again I ask the question: were you sitting inside and familiar with the complex of weapons and control?
          1. Grigory_45
            Grigory_45 17 March 2018 14: 43
            +3
            Quote: vorobey
            I ask the question again

            not again, but for the first time. Prior to this, you did not dare to ask questions, but tried to portray something with general phrases.
            Quote: vorobey
            familiar with the complex weapons and control

            Sign. Fundamentally, they do not differ from Puma or another machine with uninhabited BM.
            1. vorobey
              vorobey 17 March 2018 15: 10
              +5
              Quote: Gregory_45
              not again, but for the first time. Prior to this, you did not dare to ask questions, but tried to portray something with general phrases.

              ok ... then I ask a question ...
              Quote: vorobey
              were you sitting inside and familiar with the armament and control complex?



              Quote: Gregory_45
              Fundamentally, they do not differ from Puma or another machine with uninhabited BM.


              Do you know Puma in practice?
              1. Grigory_45
                Grigory_45 17 March 2018 15: 29
                +4
                Quote: vorobey
                Do you know Puma in practice?

                Do you know each other? With Puma, with Boomerang? What are your statements based on?
                1. vorobey
                  vorobey 17 March 2018 15: 42
                  +4
                  Quote: Gregory_45
                  Quote: vorobey
                  Do you know Puma in practice?

                  Do you know each other? With Puma, with Boomerang? What are your statements based on?


                  here it started blah blah ... by the way, I first asked what your statements are based on ... laughing as I understand it, you are unfamiliar with Puma ... Then the following questions are there if there is nothing super duper why K16 is lower than analogues, why are we developing modules for the same South Africa? what analogs are the active protection systems (KAZ), optical-electronic suppression (KOEP), electromagnetic protection systems (SEMZ) and why only we have developed a single wheeled platform for armored personnel carriers and infantry fighting vehicles
                  1. Grigory_45
                    Grigory_45 17 March 2018 16: 03
                    +4
                    Quote: vorobey
                    here it started blah blah ... by the way I first asked

                    yeah, like in kindergarten - I'm the first! Above in the comments that you saw very well, there are answers to your questions. do not consider it difficult to read (or have already read, but play in public)
                    Quote: vorobey
                    why k16 below analogues

                    when did you come up with this? What is it?
                    Quote: vorobey
                    and why only we have developed a single wheeled platform for armored personnel carriers and infantry fighting vehicles

                    but it made fun)) Almost any wheel by simple manipulations turns into an armored personnel carrier or infantry fighting vehicle. At least the same Boxer
                    Yes, KAZ and abroad know what it is, and KOEP, and SDR, and SEMZ. Believe me. there are not troglodytes with stone axes in caves live. They also understand something
                    1. vorobey
                      vorobey 17 March 2018 16: 08
                      +2
                      Quote: Gregory_45
                      Almost any wheeled vehicle by simple manipulations turns into an armored personnel carrier or infantry fighting vehicle. At least the same Boxer


                      you start to scare me ... the purpose of the machines is different ...
                      Quote: Gregory_45
                      Quote: vorobey
                      why K16 is lower than analogues
                      when did you come up with this? What is it?


                      This is not me. They came up with the performance characteristics ...
                      1. Grigory_45
                        Grigory_45 17 March 2018 16: 38
                        +2
                        Quote: vorobey
                        the purpose of the machines is different

                        the purpose is different, but constructive? Not by that much. In fact, all the differences between the BMP and the armored personnel carrier are the invoice armor protection and another combat module, plus the ability to install additional protection systems such as KAZ. By the way, the differences between the T-15 BMP and the T-14 tank, which were also created on the same platform, are an order of magnitude higher (recall at least the front- and rear-engine layouts).
    3. KVU-NSVD
      KVU-NSVD 17 March 2018 14: 25
      +5
      and here
      have no analogues and abroad too
      - Causes a smile. Than at least the German “Boxer” is not an analogue? Or the Finnish Patria? Or South African Mbombe 8?
      Well, it's not about the car in general, but about some systems ..
      many systems have no analogues and abroad too
      hi
    4. BIP PS FSB RF
      BIP PS FSB RF 17 March 2018 14: 26
      +4
      If you quote - then keep the meaning
      а many systems have no analogues and abroad too

      It's not about a machine that has no analogues, but about systems on this machine.
      1. Grigory_45
        Grigory_45 17 March 2018 14: 37
        +6
        Quote: BIP PS FSB RF
        It's not about a machine that has no analogues, but about systems on this machine

        systems enter the car. It is their presence that makes the machine "unparalleled by analogies." Wheels of taxes do not have (square?), Or a radio station? Or maybe a laser gun is standing, or a nuclear engine? Look at things soberly
        1. BIP PS FSB RF
          BIP PS FSB RF 18 March 2018 02: 01
          +1
          Quote: Gregory_45
          Quote: BIP PS FSB RF
          It's not about a machine that has no analogues, but about systems on this machine

          systems enter the car. It is their presence that makes the machine "unparalleled by analogies." Wheels of taxes do not have (square?), Or a radio station? Or maybe a laser gun is standing, or a nuclear engine? Look at things soberly

          It is I who soberly look at things and what is written in the article. About the machine itself, which has no analogues in the world, there is nothing there - these are your speculations. There about the system. Although they are part of the composition, in total they may not give the effect of the absence of analogues, but working under certain conditions give a big plus. And one of the systems that CAN BE installed is a network-centric management system. We are now introducing it. I don’t know the rest, but I trust the specialists.
          1. Grigory_45
            Grigory_45 18 March 2018 12: 29
            +1
            Reason logically. The machine consists of systems - roughly speaking, a chassis, a power plant, a power unit, protection, armament, FCS, communications, navigation, etc. It is the presence of some special system (or its special design) - "having no analogues" - that makes the whole machine as a whole. It does not happen that everything was know-how, in any device there are traditional things. In this case, the features of one (or several) systems that allocate the machine, and make it "having no analogues." You simply clung to the word, not understanding the main thing - the essence.
            Quote: BIP PS FSB RF
            And one of the systems that CAN BE installed is a network-centric control system

            and you want to say that she - has no analogues? Ridiculously) the same mattresses circled the system in the war with Iraq, and its ideology originated even earlier. In this business, we are far behind the same mattresses. For them it is realities, for us they are just getting ready. Our ESU TK and Andromeda are hopelessly stalled.
            There is nothing in the car that would fundamentally distinguish it from similar foreign designs (the brightest representatives were named). None of the systems. Yes, the car is new, on a level, for us - in something breakthrough, but not on a global scale. So write - it has no analogues in Russia, it will be more correct.
            Quote: BIP PS FSB RF
            I don’t know the rest, but I trust the specialists.

            yeah, and I’m arguing about this right away) Or did the manager (who calls the caliber of the gun “barrel diameter”) now become a great specialist in design? Then I’m doubly funny)
        2. Moore
          Moore 18 March 2018 11: 31
          +3
          It is amazing how two venerable commentators discuss what they have never used, not managed, not exploited.
    5. RASKAT
      RASKAT 17 March 2018 14: 31
      0
      It is gratifying to hear that a module with an 57mm gun would be dopped by the end of the Boomerang tests and excellent.
      1. vorobey
        vorobey 17 March 2018 15: 33
        +3
        Quote: RASKAT
        It is gratifying to hear that a module with an 57mm gun would be dopped by the end of the Boomerang tests and excellent.


        dear Gregory 45 loves foreign cars and refers to them ... however .. An armored vehicle Paramount Mbombe 8 with an 8x8 wheel formula, equipped with the AU-220M combat module of the Russian Central Research Institute Burevestnik JSC with a 57-mm automatic cannon, at the KADEX-2016 exhibition. Astana, June 2016 (c) press service of Rosoboronexport JSC
        1. Grigory_45
          Grigory_45 17 March 2018 15: 39
          +1
          Quote: vorobey
          dear Gregory 45 loves foreign cars

          can I think that you love? Be correct and do not speculate. Moreover, here we are discussing not my modest person, but cars.
          Quote: vorobey
          and refers to them

          I wonder what to refer to, if not foreign cars, speaking of foreign analogues? Maybe enlighten, teach the dark, how to?
        2. Grigory_45
          Grigory_45 17 March 2018 15: 40
          +1
          Quote: vorobey
          Armored vehicle Paramount Mbombe 8 with an 8x8 wheel configuration, equipped with the AU-220M combat module of the Russian Central Research Institute Burevestnik JSC with a 57-mm automatic gun

          By the way, the photo shows the Kazakh armored personnel carrier Barys, and it will not go on a series with Baikal.
          1. vorobey
            vorobey 17 March 2018 15: 51
            +2
            Quote: Gregory_45
            and he’s not going to the series with Baikal.


            As far as I know, Kazakhs still choose ...

            and about correctness .. and modest people ..
            Quote: Gregory_45
            According to the writing style and the beginning of the debate, I have the opinion that you know very little about these machines


            Quote: Gregory_45
            By the way, in the photo - the Kazakh armored personnel carrier "Barys"

            https://bmpd.livejournal.com/1938019.html
            1. Grigory_45
              Grigory_45 17 March 2018 16: 08
              +1
              Quote: vorobey
              and about correctness .. and modest people ..
              Quote: Gregory_45
              According to the writing style and the beginning of the debate, I have the opinion that you know very little about these machines

              those. am I to blame for the fact that you write and ask stupid questions? And if you look in the mirror and take measures (to yourself)? An adequate person reacts adequately to criticism. I hope you are adequate enough to lead an adult conversation?
              Quote: vorobey
              https://bmpd.livejournal.com/1938019.html

              do not give me links. In the photo - it is Barys. Which was created on the basis of Mbble. The differences are small, but there are - in particular, the engine and BM (in the standard version of the South African machine has a machine gun)
              Quote: vorobey
              As far as I know, Kazakhs still choose

              kakhzakhs are in full swing with a module with a 30-mm gun. And they don’t remember Baikal. There was such a topic, but floated away.
              1. vorobey
                vorobey 17 March 2018 16: 18
                +2
                Quote: Gregory_45
                kakhzakhs are in full swing with a module with a 30-mm gun. And they don’t remember Baikal. There was such a topic, but floated away.


                did I miss something? they adopted, how many units? I can’t find the data ..
                Quote: Gregory_45
                those. am I to blame for the fact that you write and ask stupid questions? And if you look in the mirror and take measures (to yourself)? An adequate person reacts adequately to criticism. I hope you are adequate enough to lead an adult conversation?


                Gregory, unlike .. I can admit my mistakes .. so here by .. above I wrote to you about logic and stupidity, you expose yourself.
                1. Grigory_45
                  Grigory_45 17 March 2018 16: 30
                  +1
                  [quote = vorobey] did i miss something? they adopted, how many units? [/ quote]
                  I wrote: [quote = vorobey] [quote = Grigory_45] kakhzakhs are in full swing with a module with a 30-mm gun. [/ Quote]
                  the car is on trial. In the amount of so far one piece, with the module it is not very clear whose development (I assume that the Kazakhs were mutilating with the Turks from Aselsan) with a 30-mm gun. However, it’s very simple here - the tests will end, and the car will be shown to the world in its final form. Then we find out whose data was more correct
                  1. vorobey
                    vorobey 17 March 2018 16: 41
                    +3
                    Quote: Gregory_45
                    the car is on trial. In the amount of so far one piece


                    Our centaurs also rolled ... and where are they?

                    by the way about the 57mm gun, it wasn’t for you ... until the end, they probably couldn’t decide on this caliber considering it excessive for such a technique .. however, Syria’s practice has shown effectiveness ..
                    1. Grigory_45
                      Grigory_45 17 March 2018 17: 09
                      +3
                      Quote: vorobey
                      about a 57mm gun it wasn’t for you

                      in a manger, in a manger with such answers ..) If you are afraid that someone else, except the addressee, might respond to your comment, then .. it’s better not to write anything at all. And then suddenly? ..) Here I can advise you only one thing - often put yourself in the place of another person. Perhaps you will understand something. My name, by the way, was attributed
                      Quote: vorobey
                      Our centaurs also rolled ... and where are they?

                      logic from the same series. Our rolled for familiarization, the Kazakhs are tested before adoption. Different things? And the fact that the car is being tested with a 30 mm says a lot.
                      1. vorobey
                        vorobey 17 March 2018 17: 13
                        +4
                        Quote: Gregory_45
                        Our rolled for familiarization, the Kazakhs are tested before adoption. Different things?


                        everything .. specialist killed ... killed in one sentence .. poor Kazakhs apparently due to lack of funds based on tests of one unit are ready to decide on adoption ... do not say it anymore ..

                        By the way, in 16, why didn’t they accept it?
    6. Incvizitor
      Incvizitor 17 March 2018 14: 37
      +1
      It's not about armored personnel carriers in general, but about
      many systems
      so it could well add innovations that the “boxer" doesn’t have.
      stubbornly did not notice anything in Boomerang that would not have a place on foreign cars.

      Well, I think the newest armored personnel carrier has all the same that it’s not special (maybe for example new alloys of armor and materials), which others don’t have, though we don’t know exactly what will be soon ...
      1. Grigory_45
        Grigory_45 17 March 2018 14: 53
        +1
        Quote: Incvizitor
        maybe for example new alloys of armor and materials), which others do not have,

        each manufacturer has their own armor protection recipes (who are able to develop them themselves, and not buy ready-made solutions). Is it possible that steel and aluminum and ceramics (in the complex) are still not used to protect BMMs? Do not make me laugh)
    7. Artek
      Artek 17 March 2018 14: 50
      0
      clumsy on a vskid, and even the name, some kind of Australian.
    8. - = ANTRAX = -
      - = ANTRAX = - 17 March 2018 16: 12
      0
      Of all of the above, only BARYS has an uninhabited weapons module. at the exhibition it was demonstrated with ay-220m. this had no analogues.
    9. Alekseev
      Alekseev 17 March 2018 16: 41
      +3
      Quote: Gregory_45
      causes



























      Quote: Gregory_45
      evokes a smile. Than at least the German “Boxer” is not an analogue? Or the Finnish Patria? Or South African Mbombe 8?

      Causes a smile your opinion. yes
      Do you for certain know the characteristics of units and assemblies, the properties of armor protection, the characteristics of the armament of these armored vehicles, the engineering solutions used in their design and production?
      Or if the "box" of a characteristic shape on 8 wheels, is that an analog?
      Although, of course, all cars, tanks and armored personnel carriers are somewhat analogous ... wink
      1. Grigory_45
        Grigory_45 17 March 2018 17: 55
        +3
        Quote: Alekseev
        Makes you smile

        The one who smiles last is smiling well)
        1. Is there a modular security system? Yes, our enemies use this.
        2. Is there an electric station BM? There is. Familiar and this in the West.
        3. Are there any ARMs? Yes, workstations are available.
        4. The same as circular video surveillance systems.
        5. Is there a power quick-change block? Yes, the Germans were among the first to practice this, to combine the engine with the box and related systems into a single module.
        6. Is the ramp there? Yes, there is.
        7. It is ridiculous to talk about communications and topographic interfaces. And there is packet data, and GPS, and much more. In the West, cars are now generally considered not as separate combat units, but as part of a common system (inclusion in a single information and control field)
        8. KAZ and other active protection systems are there? There is, and KAZ, and KOEP, and SDR.
        9. Protection against explosion - also available. Moreover, as I have already mentioned, in the field of MRAP we not only were not the first, but also do not occupy leading positions.
        What else is left? What other features? All?
        The car is new to us. There are analogues in the West. And I have enough mind not to judge by appearance (otherwise I would say that the BTR-80 is also an analogue, because it has 8 wheels). Who forbids to think?
    10. cariperpaint
      cariperpaint 17 March 2018 17: 26
      0
      many systems and not the whole machine
    11. myrzilka
      myrzilka 18 March 2018 13: 50
      0
      Quote: Gregory_45
      Than at least the German “Boxer” is not an analogue? Or the Finnish Patria? Or South African Mbombe 8?

      The German is unable to swim, the Finn can swim in the rivers. But the general difference is that everyone has an inhabited tower, a boomerang with an uninhabited module and rocket-cannon weapons on it. And if you put the Baikal module with a 57 mm gun there, this will be an opener.
      1. Grigory_45
        Grigory_45 18 March 2018 14: 37
        +1
        Quote: myrzilka
        everyone has an inhabited tower

        Nonsense) Machines can carry both habitable and uninhabited modules. The “Boxer” has a variant of an armored personnel carrier BM with a 12,7-mm machine gun and AGS, and a variant of an infantry fighting vehicle with a 30-mm cannon and ATGM Spike or MBDA MMP (for example, KMW RCT-30 from Puma)


        On "Patria" the same thing - remotely controlled BM (Kongsberg MCT-30) with a 30-mm gun or BM with a machine gun. In principle, the machine is capable of carrying a 105 mm cannon or a 120 mm mortar.

        Quote: myrzilka
        boomerang with uninhabited module and rocket-cannon armament on it

        in the BMP variant. In the version of the armored personnel carrier - a machine gun, that's all. On the Boomerang they put the inhabited BO Berezhok (from BMP-2M). You can put any combat module.
        Quote: myrzilka
        German is unable to swim

        Boxer has such an opportunity. Anyway - is a floating machine "unparalleled"?
        Do you even imagine the difference between analog and copy?
    12. Conserp
      Conserp 18 March 2018 16: 22
      +1
      Quote: Gregory_45
      "have no analogues and abroad too
      - Causes a smile. Than at least the German “Boxer” is not an analogue? Or the Finnish Patria? Or South African Mbombe 8?

      -
      Distorting is not good.
      -
      many systems have no analogues and abroad too


    13. Reserve buildbat
      Reserve buildbat 18 March 2018 20: 30
      +3
      Gregory, you would be ashamed to distort so openly and stupidly)))
      “I’ll say this: no one has done this before in our country, and many systems [i] [/ i] have no analogues abroad too "
      SYSTEMS, not APCs. Be careful)))
      1. Grigory_45
        Grigory_45 18 March 2018 21: 14
        +1
        Quote: Stroibat stock
        Be careful)

        Which I advise you. Do not take it as labor before reading a comment the next time, and read existing ones. I understand that this is much more difficult than quickly embossing your three pennies, but much more reasonable.
        Quote: Gregory_45
        The machine consists of systems ... It is the presence of some special system (or its special design) - "having no analogues" - that makes the whole machine as a whole. It does not happen that everything was know-how, in any device there are traditional things. In this case, the features of one (or several) systems that allocate the machine, and make it "having no analogues." You simply clung to the word, not understanding the main thing - the essence.

        Quote: Gregory_45
        stubbornly did not notice anything in Boomerang that would not have a place on foreign cars. Did you install a photonic engine, or super-armor? There is nothing special there (by modern standards)

        On a simple example. They did, for example. The world's first variable sweep wing aircraft. He has no analogues? Yes sir. Why? Because his wing has the ability to change the installation angle (sweep) - which other planes do not have. Everything else in it can be absolutely traditional - the same jet engines, the traditional classical scheme, etc. Only one non-standard system. Which made the whole apparatus.
        Or, such an example. The same Armata. Has no analogues? Basically. among serial tanks - no, it doesn’t. Maybe his caterpillar mover was replaced with something else? No, geese. Is the engine special? no, diesel. Is the gun special? No, it’s the same, a shell throws powder gases. And then what? A "just something" unconventional layout. those. armored capsule and uninhabited BO. In fact, the only system that gave the title to the whole machine.
    14. Oleg-322223223322
      Oleg-322223223322 26 March 2018 18: 46
      0
      Grigory_45 - causes a smile. Than at least the German “Boxer” is not an analogue? Or the Finnish Patria? Or South African Mbombe 8?

      DADY, yes, you first study the topic and then spew out stupid things. All of the above armored vehicles can not swim and do not have an uninhabited combat module, while the K-16 has comparable protection
      1. Grigory_45
        Grigory_45 26 March 2018 19: 56
        +1
        Quote: Oleg-322223223322
        you first study the topic and then spit out stupid things

        which I advise you hi
  2. Lenivets2
    Lenivets2 17 March 2018 14: 23
    0
    "A new generation armored personnel carrier based on the Boomerang unified wheeled armored platform will be radically different from current vehicles of this type."
    Well, firstly, I must add: it will be radically different from current machines of this type domestic development.
    Secondly, it was known immediately (that is, a very long time ago).
    That there is no news on the “Boomerang” and he decided to stir up interest in it with a meaningless set of letters? hi
    I would say when it goes into the series and in how many, and howls like how gorgeous it is, how lucky we are, we’ll tear it all together, but we don’t have it, but someday it will be hesitated.
  3. groks
    groks 17 March 2018 14: 26
    0
    Wheel nedobmp obtained. This is neither good nor bad - the whole world is already stamping such.
    1. Grigory_45
      Grigory_45 17 March 2018 14: 33
      +2
      Quote: groks
      underbmp obtained.

      why Nedo BMP? The most common, only the type of mover is different. Which also has advantages)
      1. groks
        groks 17 March 2018 14: 37
        0
        For police operations - just a magic car. For motorized rifles - one fragmentation shell makes it immobilized, the tracked vehicle would simply swing.
        1. Voyager
          Voyager 17 March 2018 14: 40
          +3
          Quote: groks
          For motorized rifles - one fragmentation shell makes immobility

          Is not a fact
          1. vorobey
            vorobey 17 March 2018 17: 32
            +4
            Quote: Voyager
            Quote: groks
            For motorized rifles - one fragmentation shell makes immobility

            Is not a fact


            one high-explosive fragmentation shell APC smashes into chips .. with a direct hit .. wink it is a fact..
        2. Grigory_45
          Grigory_45 17 March 2018 14: 57
          +3
          Quote: groks
          one fragmentation shell makes it immobilized, the tracked vehicle would simply swing.

          the wheel is able to move, losing part of the wheels. The caterpillar equipment also somehow doesn’t really like it very much when it fires the harp.
          In principle, for vehicles weighing up to 30-35 tons, both engines are entitled to life, and the vehicles have the same level of armor protection and armament. The wheel is more mobile and cheaper, but inferior in cross-country ability. If the machine is more than 36-40 tons, then the tracked vehicle already has an advantage (both in carrying capacity and in mobility)
          1. Hiller
            Hiller 17 March 2018 15: 13
            +5
            wheel equipment has a longer resource, higher speed, cheaper to manufacture and operate ... there is no way to invent a bicycle .. there are pluses and minuses too
          2. vorobey
            vorobey 17 March 2018 15: 26
            +4
            Quote: Gregory_45
            the wheel is able to move, losing part of the wheels. The caterpillar equipment also somehow doesn’t really like it very much when it fires the harp.


            If you don’t know, then the caterpillar equipment and with the harrows shot as you say without part of the road wheels can again put on the harp and move.
            1. Grigory_45
              Grigory_45 17 March 2018 17: 21
              +1
              If, as always, you did not notice, it was a matter of the fact that any mover can be broken. Like everything created by human hands. The wheel will lose its stroke if it is torn off (not punched, namely torn off) at least two wheels. It is enough for a goose to break one finger, and dances with a crowbar, a sledgehammer and prayers to such and such mother begin. Well, if not under fire. Each of the movers has both pros and cons, and it is not possible to determine the unequivocally best for all TVDs for cars of different masses and purposes.
              1. vorobey
                vorobey 17 March 2018 17: 26
                +3
                Quote: Gregory_45
                It’s enough for a goose to smash one finger,


                the modern special thinks in categories of the last century ...
                1. Grigory_45
                  Grigory_45 17 March 2018 17: 41
                  +1
                  Quote: vorobey
                  think in categories

                  apparently the keyword thinks)
                  You didn’t see the elephant. Well, okay, not everyone is given ..
                  1. vorobey
                    vorobey 17 March 2018 17: 45
                    +3
                    Quote: Gregory_45
                    Quote: vorobey
                    think in categories

                    apparently the keyword thinks)
                    You didn’t see the elephant. Well, okay, not everyone is given ..


                    keyword of the last century ..

                    and I considered an elephant .. if everything as you say and you are so special, then we can never get simple army users that never have analogues in the world ... laughing
                    1. Grigory_45
                      Grigory_45 17 March 2018 18: 01
                      +2
                      Quote: vorobey
                      never get never having analogues in the world.

                      Do you need exactly no analogs, or just good? Let the sticker be glued, with the director’s signature - they say, I assure you that this machine has no analogues in the universe (in parentheses - I swear by my mom!), And may there be happiness to you)
                      Quote: vorobey
                      last century keyword

                      someone, not you to judge. Moreover, you have already been successfully caught in speculation (by the way, even in such a short comment, they are amazing how you manage)
                      1. vorobey
                        vorobey 17 March 2018 18: 06
                        +4
                        Quote: Gregory_45
                        Especially in the conjectures you have already been successfully caught (by the way, even in such a short comment they are - it’s amazing how you manage)


                        whom and on what they caught this forum users decide .. laughing

                        By the way, for the so-called speculation, I apologized and you ... for mine are not .. although I was not the only one to tell you .. You wrote off everything to the irony .. weak? .
  4. tchoni
    tchoni 17 March 2018 14: 40
    +1
    The boomerang is booming, it is booming, but still it isn’t in any way ... Actually, the situation with new products reminds of this with the BTR-90 and the “black eagle”. They drove to exhibitions, praised in newspapers and lowered zilch ...
    1. The comment was deleted.
      1. The comment was deleted.
  5. san4es
    san4es 17 March 2018 14: 47
    +3
    K-16 based on the unified platform "Boomerang". Now it is at the stage of preliminary tests
    footage of the dynamic display of “Army 2017” soldier 24 August
  6. Ratmir_Ryazan
    Ratmir_Ryazan 17 March 2018 15: 02
    0
    Of course the new Bomerang BTR is good, but it must also have a DZ and KAZ, otherwise it’s just a target at the enemy’s shooting range ...
    1. groks
      groks 17 March 2018 15: 26
      0
      Which opponent? This is for WHO.
      1. Ratmir_Ryazan
        Ratmir_Ryazan 17 March 2018 16: 07
        +1
        They will arm Rosguardia with boomerangs, and its task in wartime is to protect strategic objects in the rear, that is, enemy DRGs will work against them, attacking these armored personnel carriers from an ambush using ATGMs, the same will happen if these armored personnel carriers participate in local conflicts of small and medium intensity ...

        DZ and KAZ should be on all Russian military equipment, this is ideal, but you need to start with tanks and armored personnel carriers ...
        1. groks
          groks 17 March 2018 16: 38
          0
          What are DRGs? Where did they come from, in the sense of ours, ATGMs?
  7. igor1981
    igor1981 17 March 2018 15: 06
    +1
    To be honest, this “Boomerang" is such a squalor. It would be better if the BTR-90 in the versions of Berezhok and BTR-90M were developed and adopted.
    1. Grigory_45
      Grigory_45 17 March 2018 15: 47
      +4
      Quote: igor1981
      It would be better if the BTR-90 in the versions of Berezhok and BTR-90M were developed and adopted.

      Tell us about the advantages of the BTR-90, and why is it not squalor, but the Bumrang?
    2. The comment was deleted.
  8. JON IVAHOVISH
    JON IVAHOVISH 17 March 2018 15: 17
    +1
    In Germany there is the same, in England it is similar - Sweden also has
  9. The comment was deleted.
  10. niko64
    niko64 17 March 2018 15: 59
    +1
    I don’t like such silhouettes (tall, bulky), convenient targets .... Of course, modern combat divides opponents by 5-10 km. But there are other situations ...
  11. vorobey
    vorobey 17 March 2018 16: 28
    +2
    Grigory_45,

    Okay .. for my speculation I'm ready to apologize ..

    I also ask you to apologize for the distortion of the meaning in the first comment .. because of which the cheese boron went ..


    Quote: Gregory_45
    You see what’s the matter. You didn’t understand me. Are you indignant at my disrespectful attitude to our technology? So, firstly, he was not there, and secondly, he had seen enough of something, and was no longer a curiosity. Tired. And the irony in me is caused by the words of all sorts of managers about "having no analogues." Not about the technique itself, but about the words. It would be someone else to listen to - the gender designer is just a manager, albeit a high one. He is not even a constructor. By the way, in the issue of "Military Acceptance" dedicated to Boomerang, this handsome man generally said an epic thing - "the diameter of the barrel of the gun." A technically competent specialist will never say that. Actually, after such statements I’m no longer outraged, but simply ironic over them)
  12. demokrat86
    demokrat86 17 March 2018 16: 42
    +4
    Already sick of these here: "we will create, develop, began testing and have no analogues." Create a test and give to the troops, then scream on all the streets what the fuck you are
  13. vorobey
    vorobey 17 March 2018 16: 52
    +2
    Grigory_45,
    Quote: Gregory_45
    Quote: vorobey
    the purpose of the machines is different

    the purpose is different, but constructive? Not by that much. In fact, all the differences between the BMP and the armored personnel carrier are the invoice armor protection and another combat module, plus the ability to install additional protection systems such as KAZ. By the way, the differences between the T-15 BMP and the T-14 tank, which were also created on the same platform, are an order of magnitude higher (recall at least the front- and rear-engine layouts).


    By the way, even before the appearance of the world T14, I was one of the few who defended the rear location of the MTO for the tank and was right ... in addition, I have an even more bold assumption that we will not see the armature in the troops .. it will remain an intermediate link to the robotic complex .. If you are such a specialist and really familiar with armature .. I would like to hear an opinion ... how far am I from the truth? hi
    1. Grigory_45
      Grigory_45 17 March 2018 17: 32
      +1
      Quote: vorobey
      By the way, even before the appearance of the world T14, I was one of the few who defended the rear location of the MTO for the tank

      For a tank, rear MTO is preferred. For many reasons (security, camouflage, weight distribution, etc.). If it is, of course, precisely for MBT. It would be rather strange to hear a different opinion. On the BTR and BMP, in theory, the engine should also be put behind, but then such important factors (which are not presented to the tank), such as the convenience of landing / dismounting the landing force, come up on the stage, and you have to put up with the presence of MTO in the nose.
      Quote: vorobey
      it will remain an intermediate link to the robotic complex

      it is hard to say. I do not believe in the imminent appearance (in the army) of robotic systems instead of tanks. Armata will certainly go to the troops, in that form. in which it is, but it will not become the main tank. You could hear only my purely personal opinion, and expressed it.
      1. vorobey
        vorobey 17 March 2018 17: 36
        +3
        Quote: Gregory_45
        It would be rather strange to hear a different opinion.


        nevertheless, muzzles here beat each other .. Merkava supporters and we ..

        Quote: Gregory_45
        Armata will certainly go to the troops, in that form. in which there is


        I will stay with my ..

        Quote: Gregory_45
        it will not become the main tank.


        I agree ... the old T72 upgraded to the level of B3 and T90 fully perform their functions ..
        1. Grigory_45
          Grigory_45 17 March 2018 18: 04
          +1
          Quote: vorobey
          nevertheless, the faces here beat each other .. Merkava supporters and we

          ha)) Who would doubt that the exceptional and the tank is exceptional)
    2. Conserp
      Conserp 18 March 2018 16: 28
      +2
      Quote: vorobey
      By the way, even before the appearance of the world T14, I was one of the few who defended the rear location of the MTO for the tank and was right ...

      This is upheld in any Soviet tank design textbook.
      1. vorobey
        vorobey 19 March 2018 12: 08
        +3
        Quote: Conserp
        This is upheld in any Soviet tank design textbook.


        That's it ... that's why I had to explain the basics .. those who are unfamiliar with them .. good
        1. Conserp
          Conserp 19 March 2018 19: 45
          +1
          99% fans of God's chosen Merkava.
  14. Grigory_45
    Grigory_45 17 March 2018 17: 38
    0
    vorobey,
    Quote: vorobey
    poor Kazakhs apparently due to lack of funds on the basis of tests of one unit are ready to make a decision on adoption

    Do you know what stages a machine goes through before being put into service? And what types of tests are there? (PI, GI)? You, I apologize, either do not understand what is written, or you deliberately pretend that you do not understand. For some reason, I am inclined to the second version. Only trolling is weak.
    1. vorobey
      vorobey 17 March 2018 17: 53
      +2
      tell me about the field tests ... in 93, I remember how BMP 3 went to Turkvo .. and how many cars there were and how all the flaws were fixed for each car, well, other crap .. probably a lot has changed in the world that one is enough cars became ..
      1. Grigory_45
        Grigory_45 17 March 2018 18: 09
        +1
        Quote: vorobey
        tell me about field trials

        Why, if you yourself are in the know? One car is enough or not enough .. it is up to the Kazakhs to decide. It is one thing to say how to do it right, and another thing to do how. According to the mind, in general, even to the factory preliminary ones, one (at least) machine of each type is rolled out (armored personnel carriers, infantry fighting vehicles, armored vehicles), even if they are on the same base. The party is already going to the GI. However, what do you care how the Kazakhs act? Let them even take the car without testing at all, what's the sadness? Nazarbayev let him be sad
  15. Grigory_45
    Grigory_45 17 March 2018 18: 16
    +1
    vorobey,
    Quote: vorobey
    weak?

    Ha, and then come up with new ones?
    By the way, we read my second comment
    Quote: Gregory_45
    Gregory_45 (Gregory) 7 Today, 16:29 ↑
    Quote: Serge Gorely
    That is, nothing new needs to be done, if there are analogues, no?
    it’s not necessary to say that “analogue has”

    doesn't explain? In my opinion, it is very intelligible that I had in mind. So why should I apologize?
    I'm just not weak. I know how to recognize mistakes, and I don’t need any urging. In that case, of course, if really not right.
    1. vorobey
      vorobey 17 March 2018 18: 29
      +2
      Quote: Gregory_45
      doesn't explain?

      the essence of the first comment does not explain ..

      Quote: Gregory_45
      I know how to recognize mistakes, and I don’t need any urging

      Yes Yes laughing

      I think there will be more topics for communication ..
      1. Grigory_45
        Grigory_45 17 March 2018 20: 23
        0
        Quote: vorobey
        the essence of the first comment does not explain.

        it's not the same for everybody. The sighted one may see, he who has ears, and he who hears, he who has reason, will understand. On this occasion, I wrote above
        Quote: Gregory_45
        You, I apologize, either do not understand what is written, or you deliberately pretend that you do not understand

        entertaining things are done on VO, moders are doing trollinog. And I’m sure that conscience and a sense of the highest justice will not allow you to slap a couple of warnings on your own. In no case)
        Quote: vorobey
        I think there will be more topics for communication

        it is unlikely
  16. Doliva63
    Doliva63 17 March 2018 18: 40
    +5
    But 3,5 m. In height is cooler than necessary, in my opinion laughing drinks And the clearance is less than 80-82. And 22 tons of weight. In the rear, of course, take root.
  17. Mentat
    Mentat 17 March 2018 20: 17
    +1
    Quote: Gregory_45
    I will say this: before us in our country, no one has done this before

    there is some truth in these words, but
    have no analogues and abroad too
    - Causes a smile. Than at least the German “Boxer” is not an analogue? Or the Finnish Patria? Or South African Mbombe 8?

    Not yet hesitated there to hesitate?
    After all, they deliberately reduced the text, that is, a liar. Is it nice to be self-conscious or how to understand it? It is written: "many systems have no analogues abroad, ”- and not the entire armored personnel carrier.
    Why then is this absurdity and deceit in your comment?
    1. Grigory_45
      Grigory_45 17 March 2018 20: 37
      +1
      Quote: Mentat
      After all, they deliberately reduced the text,

      before throwing accusations, take the trouble to read the comments, which are quite a few. And then you might think that
      Quote: Mentat
      Why then is this absurdity and deceit in your comment?
      - you said it to yourself
  18. Vlad5307
    Vlad5307 17 March 2018 22: 27
    +3
    Quote: Gregory_45
    Quote: Serge Gorely
    That is, nothing new needs to be done, if there are analogues, no?

    it’s not necessary to say that “analogue has”

    So it is said for some systems, and not at all. hi
  19. Mentat
    Mentat 17 March 2018 23: 38
    0
    Quote: Gregory_45
    Quote: Mentat
    After all, they deliberately reduced the text,

    before throwing accusations, take the trouble to read the comments, which are quite a few. And then you might think that
    Quote: Mentat
    Why then is this absurdity and deceit in your comment?
    - you said it to yourself

    By the way you react, you might think that you put a handful for the sake of pluses to your beloved, and now try to sweep it under the rug, but it still smacks of. Lies for the sake of a plus post. Himself not sick?
    1. Grigory_45
      Grigory_45 17 March 2018 23: 44
      +1
      Quote: Mentat
      Himself not sick?

      I'm funny from your comments. Judge for yourself?
      Comments read, is there anything to say? If not, then all the best hi
  20. Dietmar
    Dietmar 28 March 2018 12: 38
    0
    Some "multi- and big-star experts" who publish their comments here consider themselves so smart and on the topic that they allow themselves to at least cast doubt on the words of the general director of the Military Industrial Company (VPK) LLC. The judgment of some as to whether the troops need such a conveyor also causes a smile.