Military Review

BMPT "Terminator-2" will be adopted by the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation

68
RIA News citing a source in the military-industrial complex of the Russian Federation, reports that a decision has been made to put support vehicles in service with the Russian army tanks "Terminator 2". This decision was also made on the basis of the practice of pilot combat operation of the BMPT Terminator in Syria.


From the report:
The principal decision on adopting the Terminators has been made. In the near future is expected to sign the relevant documents.


BMPT "Terminator-2" will be adopted by the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation


In this case, the press service of "Uralvagonzavod" on this issue while the moment remains silent.

Recall that at the moment the only country whose army has put into service the Russian BMPT "Terminator" is the Republic of Kazakhstan. It happened back in 2011 year.

For your information:
The Terminator-2 is armed with two 30-mm automatic guns 2А42, two launchers with supersonic Ataka-T anti-tank missiles with a laser guidance system, two automatic grenade launchers AG-17D, and also 7,62-mm gun. It can work both on ground and on low-flying air targets, moreover in any weather conditions. Able to simultaneously fire to kill on three accompanied targets.
Photos used:
MO RF
68 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Herculesic
    Herculesic 20 March 2018 05: 35
    +2
    Due to the fact that the “Messenger of Mordovia 'did not write anything about this, I do not believe it! wassat By the way, as always, they forgot to indicate the exact date when Terminator 2 will begin to receive in the army.
    1. Lord of the Sith
      Lord of the Sith 20 March 2018 05: 42
      +7
      This year will receive 12 units. These costs are included in the military budget.
      1. svp67
        svp67 20 March 2018 16: 44
        +1
        Quote: Sith Lord
        This year will receive 12 units. These costs are included in the military budget.


        I like how they performed VLD ... Classic. Urgently, ALL T-72 and T-80 to redo this sample ... URGENT.
    2. Spartanez300
      Spartanez300 20 March 2018 05: 46
      0
      Something long tuned to take into service.
      1. BIP PS FSB RF
        BIP PS FSB RF 20 March 2018 06: 22
        +3
        Quote: Spartanez300
        Something long tuned to take into service.

        The machine is fundamentally new, it was necessary to develop a model for its application and combine it with the existing staff of other machines.
        1. avt
          avt 20 March 2018 07: 58
          +5
          Quote: BIP PS FSB RF
          The car is brand new

          And fundamentally not needed, but oh-oh-really liked Rogozin. Here and
          Quote: BIP PS FSB RF
          It was necessary to develop a model of its application and combine it with the existing staff of other machines.

          Instead of scribbling at least full-fledged BMP-3s, I'm not talking about any development of the 781B based on the T-14.
          Quote: The same LYOKHA
          Interesting ... and how it is planned to use it in the fight against the regular parts of NATO armies ...

          This is the next stage of budget development, well after
          Quote: BIP PS FSB RF
          combine with existing staff of other machines.
          ... yes even on the T-72.
          1. badens1111
            badens1111 20 March 2018 08: 05
            +7
            This is not Rogozin’s whim, but the need to have this kind of combat vehicles in the troops. The break-in in Syria has passed, so do not speculate ...
            1. avt
              avt 20 March 2018 08: 24
              +2
              Quote: badens1111
              Run-in in Syria has passed, so do not speculate ...

              On this gurney deigned to fight? wassat Maybe at first it’s like gistoria and the voices of lobbyists of this pipelats you read, then you will poke a button?
              Quote: BIP PS FSB RF
              it should not maintain a database with helicopters, lightly armored vehicles, etc.

              Is one theorist who has passed all levels of the World of the same Tanks? Well, judging by the explanation about
              Quote: BIP PS FSB RF
              There is also a tank support vehicle. What would they fulfill their tasks, and BMPT at this moment covers them from all directions from the means of destruction of tanks.

              If this is personal to me, this Filipik is addressed, then bother to start with a search engine to work in search of the Chelyabinsk object
              Quote: avt
              781,, B "
              Well, look at the archive of the site or something with a topic while reading the discussion of this topic on the forum. Then read at least about
              Quote: BIP PS FSB RF
              the moment covers them from all directions from the means of destruction of tanks.
              But you can continue about spaceships plowing the expanses of the Bolshoi Theater.
              1. badens1111
                badens1111 20 March 2018 08: 38
                +5
                Quote: avt
                Then will you poke a button?

                Auto .. maybe without rudeness?
                Are you a great specialist in BTVT and the theory of their application? Can you familiarize yourself with your writings on this topic?
                1. poquello
                  poquello 20 March 2018 09: 21
                  +1
                  Quote: badens1111
                  Quote: avt
                  Then will you poke a button?

                  Auto .. maybe without rudeness?
                  Are you a great specialist in BTVT and the theory of their application? Can you familiarize yourself with your writings on this topic?

                  and with arguments briefly, and then going to the links it is not entirely clear which of ..
              2. BIP PS FSB RF
                BIP PS FSB RF 20 March 2018 08: 39
                +1
                You, you ... Judging by your reaction, you have other methods of using BMP. I would like to read, to penetrate. And then we sinners only play tanks.
                1. avt
                  avt 20 March 2018 08: 44
                  +1
                  Quote: BIP PS FSB RF
                  I would like to read, to penetrate.

                  Oh, you're lying! You're lying to the king!
                  If real
                  Quote: BIP PS FSB RF
                  I would like to read

                  That would have taken the mouse from the hand and worked as a search engine
                  Quote: avt
                  in search of the Chelyabinsk object
                  781 ,, A "and ,, B", at least
                  Quote: avt
                  Well, look at the archive of the site on a topic with a reading of the discussion of this topic on the forum.

                  But I see how
                  Quote: badens1111
                  Are you a great specialist in BTVT and the theory of their application? Can you familiarize yourself with your writings on this topic?

                  Do not have the time wassat hard to see, that's just the answer to me to knock on the clave. bully
                  1. badens1111
                    badens1111 20 March 2018 09: 18
                    +2
                    Quote: avt
                    There is no time with difficulty seeing enough, only the answer to me is to knock on the clave.

                    So if you don’t have time and understanding, then why so many loud speeches?
            2. zoolu350
              zoolu350 20 March 2018 08: 33
              +2
              And let me ask, why do you need this under-tank or under-BMP? What functions in battle will this device perform?
              1. Dreamboat
                Dreamboat 20 March 2018 16: 55
                +4
                BMPT is in no way associated with the BMP, it is rather a tank with a modified weapon system. It is created for action in the same system with tanks, but against other goals.
                But all the "theorists" about the "infantry covers tanks" I want to send to the army .... so that they are shown how the infantry is cut off from the tanks with the help of some AGS. ... and already the tanks cover the infantry withdrawal and the removal of the wounded. So of course it used to be, during WWII, when tanks valued more than people ... and then they taught this for a long time in military schools, but the experience of modern wars has shown that the infantry doesn’t give the tank safety (it will not intercept ATGMs), but active movements . A standing tank is the best target. The infantry behind the moving tank simply will not have time, and will die if the shelling is not dangerous for the tank ...
                The experience with the BMP, by the way, was also unsuccessful: due to the large internal volume (for landing), booking an BMP is always worse than a tank. If they operate in the same system, they will simply burn up the BMP .... the same 3 crew members, and maybe the landing ... even more losses.
                So the BMPT is the right machine, that's just the extra crew members for the sake of the AGS added in vain ....
                1. Grigory_45
                  Grigory_45 21 March 2018 17: 06
                  0
                  Quote: Dreamboat
                  But all the "theorists" about "infantry covers tanks" I want to send to the army .... so that they are shown how infantry is cut off from tanks with the help of some AGS

                  Do your infantry move behind tanks exclusively on foot? At full height with a gun at the ready, as in some films about that war? You go and categorize it? BMP for what created?
                  Quote: Dreamboat
                  safety is not attached to the tank by infantry (it will not intercept ATGMs)

                  Hm. and BMPT ATGM will not intercept. And earlier. in WWII, the infantry of the Faustpatrons were not shot on the fly from the PPSh. Destroyed the calculations, before they open fire. Actually, this is the task of the infantry - identifying tank-dangerous targets and either independently suppressing them, or transmitting information about it to tanks so that they roll out from a long distance.
                  Quote: Dreamboat
                  A standing tank is the best target. The infantry behind the moving tank just does not have time

                  well, if on my own two - by itself. See above)
                  Quote: Dreamboat
                  So BMPT machine needed

                  Than? TBMP with a motorized rifle unit - worse?
                  Quote: Dreamboat
                  The experience with the BMP, by the way, was also unsuccessful: due to the large internal volume (for landing), booking an BMP is always worse than a tank

                  now it is necessary to armor infantry fighting vehicles from cumulative means and small-caliber shells - this is quite feasible. BMPT does not have a heavy tank turret - already 20 tons. In addition, it may not have a powerful passive armor to protect against tank BOPS (which has the lion's share in the mass of armor protection) - it’s not its task to engage in open battle with tanks . Therefore, the protection can be made very decent, with a mass equal to or slightly less than that of the tank.
            3. Grigory_45
              Grigory_45 20 March 2018 16: 39
              0
              Quote: badens1111
              Run-in in Syria has passed, so do not speculate ...

              What a break-in? In Syria there was only one car, for a very, very short time (something about a month in total - then, as we all remember, the car was recalled to participate in the "Army" - this was more important). Even this fact suggests that there was no running in at all, and it was unrealistic to carry it out on one machine in such a short time.
              Just the one who says is engaged in speculation: the Terminator was tested in Syria, the Su-57 was tested in Syria, etc.
          2. BIP PS FSB RF
            BIP PS FSB RF 20 March 2018 08: 07
            +5
            An infantry fighting vehicle is primarily a vehicle for delivering an airborne landing to a theater of operations and supporting it with fire, as far as necessary, it should not conduct a database with helicopters, lightly armored vehicles, etc. If the BMP does this, then it will put its landing force under attack.
            There is also a tank support vehicle. What would they fulfill their tasks, and BMPT at this moment covers them from all directions from the means of destruction of tanks.
            1. zoolu350
              zoolu350 20 March 2018 08: 38
              +2
              BMP for your information and should destroy helicopters, enemy armored personnel carriers and infantry fighting vehicles, but in addition it also delivers a landing force, which in turn supports the tank and infantry fighting vehicles. It is the infantry that protects the tanks and infantry fighting vehicles from those targets (grenade launchers and mines) that tanks and infantry fighting vehicles do not detect well.
              1. BIP PS FSB RF
                BIP PS FSB RF 20 March 2018 09: 10
                +2
                http://www.btvt.narod.ru/1/bmp_future/bmp_future.
                htm here learn at your leisure.
                BMP is not only, but primarily delivers the landing. And the infantry really protects the tanks - the concept of the Second World War. Times are changing, concepts are changing, and infantry are now trying not to substitute or clear the way for tanks.
                1. zoolu350
                  zoolu350 20 March 2018 09: 31
                  +1
                  That is, it is neither fish nor BMPT meat without infantry support that will burn from RPGs or explode in a mine, just like a regular tank. Question: "And ...... then you need it"?
                  1. BIP PS FSB RF
                    BIP PS FSB RF 20 March 2018 09: 47
                    0
                    http://btvt.info/4ourarticles/bmpt_future/bmpt_fu
                    ture.htm
                    here I ask you to familiarize yourself. It is here that the car is scolded, but the essence of the application is described correctly.
                  2. avt
                    avt 20 March 2018 10: 24
                    0
                    Quote: zoolu350
                    Question: "And ...... then you need it"?

                    bully Well, look on the net - Rogozin said, that’s almost literally I’ll get adoption. bully
                2. Grigory_45
                  Grigory_45 20 March 2018 16: 48
                  +1
                  Quote: BIP PS FSB RF
                  BMP is not only, but primarily delivers the landing.

                  "Landing," as you deigned. delivers an armored personnel carrier. BMP is designed to participate in the battle. Not in the first line, but still - supporting the tanks and destroying (or not allowing them to attack the tanks) tank dangerous targets - such as the calculations of ATGMs, RPGs, enemy infantry fighting vehicles and helicopters.
                  Quote: BIP PS FSB RF
                  And the infantry really protects the tanks

                  Following the tanks on foot, or on the BMP? Here is the answer - where is the place of the BMP.
                  Is it more logical as a BMPT - a heavy BMP? Here you have the appropriate weapons complex, and armor protection, and a mechanized infantry division (infantry).
                  1. BIP PS FSB RF
                    BIP PS FSB RF 21 March 2018 00: 01
                    0
                    Quote: Gregory_45
                    Quote: BIP PS FSB RF
                    BMP is not only, but primarily delivers the landing.
                    "Landing," as you deigned. delivers an armored personnel carrier. BMP is designed to participate in the battle. Not in the first line, but still - supporting the tanks and destroying (or not allowing them to attack the tanks) tank dangerous targets - such as the calculations of ATGMs, RPGs, enemy infantry fighting vehicles and helicopters.
                    Quote: BIP PS FSB RF
                    And the infantry really protects the tanks
                    Following the tanks on foot, or on the BMP? Here is the answer - where is the place of the BMP.
                    Is it more logical as a BMPT - a heavy BMP? Here you have the appropriate weapons complex, and armor protection, and a mechanized infantry division (infantry).

                    I have already pointed out to you to tear out words from the context - so stop doing this. Full quote:
                    And the infantry really protects the tanks - the concept of the Second World War. Times are changing, concepts are changing, and infantry are now trying not to substitute or clear the way for tanks.

                    I do not think this is right in the new realities, and I do not think that infantry should protect tanks at the cost of their lives.
                    A heavy infantry fighting vehicle can be used in certain conditions - a breakthrough to the city as a part of tanks and a landing in the front ranks of buildings. (as an example)
                    1. Grigory_45
                      Grigory_45 21 March 2018 16: 52
                      0
                      Quote: BIP PS FSB RF
                      I do not think that infantry should protect tanks at the cost of their lives

                      not to protect, but to interact. Where - on their "wheels", where (in the city) - on foot. How effective are tanks without infantry (motorized rifles, in this case)? They themselves can hardly consolidate their success - neither to occupy and defend the territory, nor to clean it. BMPTs are also incapable of clearing the terrain from resistance centers themselves with a successful tank breakthrough, for example. In the city - there is no infantryman at all. And in order not to have two vehicles similar in functionality and purpose (remember, the more unified the fleet, the less different types of vehicles - the better), isn’t it easier to assign the functions of tank support vehicles to TBMP?
                      1. BIP PS FSB RF
                        BIP PS FSB RF 22 March 2018 15: 40
                        0
                        Quote: Gregory_45
                        Quote: BIP PS FSB RF
                        I do not think that infantry should protect tanks at the cost of their lives

                        not to protect, but to interact. Where - on their "wheels", where (in the city) - on foot. How effective are tanks without infantry (motorized rifles, in this case)? They themselves can hardly consolidate their success - neither to occupy and defend the territory, nor to clean it. BMPTs are also incapable of clearing the terrain from resistance centers themselves with a successful tank breakthrough, for example. In the city - there is no infantryman at all. And in order not to have two vehicles similar in functionality and purpose (remember, the more unified the fleet, the less different types of vehicles - the better), isn’t it easier to assign the functions of tank support vehicles to TBMP?

                        I set out my position and gave links to the explanations of specialists above. There is a list of used literature.
                        I see no reason to pour from empty to empty.
              2. Glory1974
                Glory1974 20 March 2018 20: 00
                +1
                BMP for your information and must destroy helicopters,

                The BMP will not do anything to the helicopter, it’s just Wishlist, not supported by anything.
                It is the infantry that protects tanks and infantry fighting vehicles from those targets (grenade launchers and mines),

                It was in the Second World War. Now the firing range of grenade launchers is such that no submachine gun can detect a grenade thrower meters from the 500-600 and beyond.
                The only way to cover the tank with a special vehicle.
          3. Lord of the Sith
            Lord of the Sith 20 March 2018 17: 52
            +1
            Over the past 2 years, how many BMP-3s have been delivered to the troops?
        2. kapitan92
          kapitan92 20 March 2018 08: 19
          +7
          Quote: BIP PS FSB RF
          The machine is fundamentally new, it was necessary to develop a model for its application and combine it with the existing staff of other machines.

          What is fundamentally new ??? Base T 72,
          Armament:
          Gun type
          2 × 30-mm 2А42 Automatic
          Gun ammunition
          850 shells
          Machine guns
          1 × 7,62 mm PKTM (2100 rounds)
          Other weapons
          ATGM with tandem cumulative warhead (9M120-1) ATGM with high explosive warhead with ODS (9M120-1F)
          So what's new?
          Combine! Whom and with what? laughing
          1. BIP PS FSB RF
            BIP PS FSB RF 20 March 2018 08: 23
            +1
            And the rinks are round, and they are rolling, but not jumping ...

            This combination of all of the above creates a fundamentally new class of armored vehicles, with a certain range of tasks that have not been set before.
    3. MoJloT
      MoJloT 20 March 2018 10: 50
      +1
      He wrote "http://vestnik-rm.ru/news-4-20409.htm" now will definitely come)
  2. Same lech
    Same lech 20 March 2018 05: 37
    +1
    Interesting ... and how it is planned to use it in the fight against the regular parts of NATO armies ...
    it’s one thing when the enemy is a thug from Syria, and another thing is when regular NATO units enter the battle. what
    1. DimanC
      DimanC 20 March 2018 05: 41
      +4
      The regular parts of NATO somehow (almost) turned into police units. Calling them “regular” is a stretch
      1. Evil543
        Evil543 20 March 2018 05: 49
        +1
        Why? Are they suppressing riots?
      2. Same lech
        Same lech 20 March 2018 05: 58
        0
        The regular parts of NATO somehow (almost) turned into police units. Calling them “regular” is a stretch


        Well ... then I will change the introductory ...
        Two TERMINATORS -2 with a cover platoon in a small village against the IDF ISRAEL special forces attacking him with the support of attack drones and a couple of three Merkava tanks.
        Your actions?... smile
        1. poquello
          poquello 20 March 2018 09: 32
          +1
          Quote: The same Lech
          The regular parts of NATO somehow (almost) turned into police units. Calling them “regular” is a stretch


          Well ... then I will change the introductory ...
          Two TERMINATORS -2 with a cover platoon in a small village against the IDF ISRAEL special forces attacking him with the support of attack drones and a couple of three Merkava tanks.
          Your actions?... smile

          to reach the distance of destruction of automatic guns, shoot a kit of carrots, launch a rocket
        2. dlekcat
          dlekcat 20 March 2018 11: 20
          +1
          Legs in arms and drape laughing
        3. Dreamboat
          Dreamboat 20 March 2018 17: 04
          +1
          Quote: The same Lech
          The regular parts of NATO somehow (almost) turned into police units. Calling them “regular” is a stretch


          Well ... then I will change the introductory ...
          Two TERMINATORS -2 with a cover platoon in a small village against the IDF ISRAEL special forces attacking him with the support of attack drones and a couple of three Merkava tanks.
          Your actions?... smile

          Well, if so rave wassat , then: call the aircraft to destroy the "mercenaries" and strike at the places of deployment of the wave, and then, pressing the remaining "to the ground" with 30 mm fire. guns and AGS ... surround and finish off with "cover entry" ....
          Why not ask: if a tank division attacks one BMPT ...
    2. Per se.
      Per se. 20 March 2018 05: 59
      +4
      Quote: The same LYOKHA
      Interesting ... and how it is planned to use it in the fight against the regular parts of NATO armies ...
      And what, Alex, is the problem here? I once spoke to one of your comments.
      For marches, to overcome water obstacles, such a vehicle as the BMP-3 is optimal, and as a heavy vehicle, the duplex of the BMPT (specialized fire support functions for its tanks and infantry) and the heavy BTR (specialized armored vehicle function) seem to be the best. Here, the "heavy BMP" will be replaced by a bunch of BMPTs with several heavy armored personnel carriers.
      If you use a heavy tank base, then a bunch of BMPTs and heavy armored personnel carriers seem more reasonable than a “heavy infantry fighting vehicle”, which, in its appearance, is no longer suitable against the regular parts of NATO, but as an anti-guerrilla, police vehicle against terrorists. The BMPT will have a job in tandem with tanks, where, unlike the BMP, they can work not only in the first line, but if necessary, in front of the tanks.
      1. Same lech
        Same lech 20 March 2018 06: 03
        +1
        And the theater of action? ...
        Is this bundle valid for fighting in an urban setting or on an open battlefield?
        1. Per se.
          Per se. 20 March 2018 06: 40
          +5
          Quote: The same LYOKHA
          And the theater of action? ..
          Anyone where the tank base itself can be used. Moreover, we have somewhat carried away with the experience of wars with the militants, having forgotten about these most regular parts of the NATO armies, about the defense of Russia itself, where there is not only a wide geography of the landscape, but also the seasons and many water obstacles. The experiences of Afgan, Chechnya and Syria, where the enemy was militants in low-water areas, preferring partisan tactics, have no aircraft and much more, is hardly a reason to sharpen all their equipment under protection from road explosions in the column, ignoring the increase in the height of the target under shot of a sabot projectile from an enemy tank gun. If we return to the subject of BMPT and heavy armored personnel carriers, this is not an alternative to the classic wheeled armored personnel carrier or universal infantry fighting vehicle (BMD), but an addition, primarily when used with tanks. A heavy armored personnel carrier, with the refusal of reinforced weapons, will enhance protection and improve the transport function, and reducing the landing force to 6 people will allow it to be placed more comfortably and used as an assault group that will dismount faster, unfold faster for combat as a group. In addition, the defeat of such a machine with the landing party minimizes total losses. The BMPT takes on all the specialized fire support, surpassing any “heavy BMP” in this, having not only powerful weapons, but also powerful tank defense, without any problems on the transport component with the landing force, like in the BMP. In street battles, with good elevation angles, BMPT can more successfully bombard the upper floors of buildings, 30 mm guns stitch almost all typical brick and panel walls. If there are modifications of BMPT, especially for such the most complex type of combat for any equipment, like a battle in the city, there may well appear special modifications of BMPT or additional sets of protection to strengthen them in street battles.
    3. shinobi
      shinobi 20 March 2018 06: 11
      +3
      Standard. 1 terminator, 2-4 tanks and infantry on the BMP-BTR. The terminator is essentially additional heavy infantry weapons, not a panacea.
  3. Retvizan 8
    Retvizan 8 20 March 2018 05: 45
    +2
    The right technique
    Previously, the combat support of the tanks was assigned to the BMP, but BMP1 and BMP 2 are very outdated, BMP 3 is small, and their security leaves much to be desired.
    And tanks in battle really need a well-protected support vehicle.
  4. Fedorov
    Fedorov 20 March 2018 05: 46
    +1
    Yes, how many snot can you chew? Gur Khan aka Khlopotov (for those who are in the know), probably got goosebumps.
    1. Fedorov
      Fedorov 20 March 2018 05: 52
      +1
      And here is another from him - a fan of armored vehicles infa
      -BTR new generation K-16 based on the platform "Boomerang" went to preliminary tests
  5. Per se.
    Per se. 20 March 2018 05: 50
    +5
    "Terminator-2“is armed with two 30-mm automatic guns 2А42, two launchers with supersonic anti-tank Ataka-T missiles with a laser guidance system, two automatic grenade launchers AG-17D, as well as 7,62-mm machine gun.
    If we talk about "Terminator-2", then it differs from the "first", which is made on the basis of T-72, not T-90, and has a crew of three people, not five (without shooters with AGS). If it was finalized, and the AHS did coursework when firing, for example, as a driver, then that is a plus, although nothing was heard about it.
  6. tchoni
    tchoni 20 March 2018 06: 32
    +4
    The adoption of this machine into service, as well as possible characterizes the current crisis in the field of tank weapons. The fact is that modern tank guns are sharpened under a blab with self-similar, and 90% of real targets on the battlefield do not belong to tanks ....
    1. Fedorov
      Fedorov 20 March 2018 07: 29
      +6
      Well, nifiga doesn’t apply to itself. Guys who saw from afar a high-explosive fragmentation gap? And there I’m sorry 125 mm. I would like to close my eyes and drown in a trench. If next to an armored personnel carrier in a meter - splinters through.
      1. tchoni
        tchoni 20 March 2018 08: 08
        +5
        Quote: Fedorov
        Well, nifiga doesn’t apply to itself. Guys who saw from afar a high-explosive fragmentation gap? And there I’m sorry 125 mm. I would like to close my eyes and drown in a trench. If next to an armored personnel carrier in a meter - splinters through.

        Yes, that's right, only the trunk of a 125 mm gun designers refuse to lift up a cut above 30 degrees. They say it’s impossible .. (they’ll probably deceive) and they don’t want to put the commander in the commander’s commander ... They say they’re expensive ... And, most of all, they don’t want to change the monitoring and target search system from the tank. And, it is designed to search and work with such purposes as the "tank", "calculation of anti-tank guns." ... and such goals as a “sniper”, a “machine gunner” and other small people to them to the drum ... So it turns out that the relics of a duckling are more than enough, but obviously lacks flexibility.
        I myself do not at all consider the BMPT weapon system to be somehow ideal - rather, "I blinded it from what it was," but this is at least something in the conditions when the uncompromising PTSAU was stupidly made from the latest "armata" ....
      2. Glory1974
        Glory1974 20 March 2018 20: 07
        0
        Guys who saw from afar a high-explosive fragmentation gap? And there forgive 125 mm.

        Of course there is a lot of power. But the fragments of a tank shell are large and few. Therefore, when shooting at infantry are not particularly effective, especially when compared with self-propelled guns. The trajectory is flat; you cannot throw it into the trench.
    2. cariperpaint
      cariperpaint 20 March 2018 08: 31
      0
      tanks are a priori imprisoned.
      1. tchoni
        tchoni 20 March 2018 08: 59
        +1
        Quote: cariperpaint
        tanks are a priori imprisoned.

        Tanks were a priori imprisoned for fighting infantry and field fortifications. And the tank destroyers of them were made by the Germans in WWII .... And our post-war designers with their "three minutes of the tank’s life in battle" deepened and encouraged insanity.
        1. cariperpaint
          cariperpaint 20 March 2018 12: 05
          +1
          ingenious))) I haven’t laughed like that for a long time)))))) Well, the very first tanks in a bunch of machine guns are possible. ))) but then some of them got guns .... then others ... then the tasks of the machines changed logically. and what do our designers have to do with it, I didn’t understand at all ... they created what the tankers themselves demanded of them and not what they dreamed at night.
    3. Sands Careers General
      Sands Careers General 20 March 2018 11: 00
      +1
      How long have you seen real targets on the battlefield? Generally been in battle?
  7. konstantin68
    konstantin68 20 March 2018 08: 23
    +3
    Quote: The same Lech
    The regular parts of NATO somehow (almost) turned into police units. Calling them “regular” is a stretch


    Well ... then I will change the introductory ...
    Two TERMINATORS -2 with a cover platoon in a small village against the IDF ISRAEL special forces attacking him with the support of attack drones and a couple of three Merkava tanks.
    Your actions?... smile

    I cause airstrike. And then they have tanks and drones, and we are with three-rulers.
  8. konstantin68
    konstantin68 20 March 2018 08: 25
    +1
    Quote: kapitan92
    Quote: BIP PS FSB RF
    The machine is fundamentally new, it was necessary to develop a model for its application and combine it with the existing staff of other machines.

    What is fundamentally new ??? Base T 72,
    Armament:
    Gun type
    2 × 30-mm 2А42 Automatic
    Gun ammunition
    850 shells
    Machine guns
    1 × 7,62 mm PKTM (2100 rounds)
    Other weapons
    ATGM with tandem cumulative warhead (9M120-1) ATGM with high explosive warhead with ODS (9M120-1F)
    So what's new?
    Combine! Whom and with what? laughing

    That really, what to do there, what have they been messing with for almost 3 years? Everything is very simple. Wrote and into battle!
    1. san4es
      san4es 20 March 2018 10: 10
      +2
      Quote: konstantin68
      ... have they been messing around for almost 3 years already?

      hi ... Started in the 80s ... from Afghanistan were "conceived" ... starting with Object 199 "Frame" on the basis of the T-72A:

      ... Next Object 787 "Viper"

      Terminator T-72:

      Terminator T-90:

      ... Now here we are based on the T-14 soldier
  9. steelmaker
    steelmaker 20 March 2018 08: 26
    0
    To support tanks, the car is needed! At least a couple of battalions would not hurt.
  10. moreman78
    moreman78 20 March 2018 08: 49
    0
    Quote: zoolu350
    And let me ask, why do you need this under-tank or under-BMP? What functions in battle will this device perform?

    There is only one function - to cut the budget!
  11. gukoyan
    gukoyan 20 March 2018 08: 58
    +1
    Ohhhh, well, really the brain turned on)
    Even I understand that this is a very great car, especially in urban areas.
    1. Manul
      Manul 20 March 2018 10: 54
      0
      Quote: gukoyan
      especially in urban areas.

      With an elevation angle of the main weapon of 45 g? It seems to me not enough. It would be nice if they somehow managed to put on the BMPT "KORD MT" 6P49MT. Everything seems to be fine there with an elevation angle - just for urban fights.
  12. dzvero
    dzvero 20 March 2018 09: 35
    +1
    Terminator is a rather controversial car. At first it was offered as a replacement for infantry, because now you will not run after the tank, and if the tank waits, it will turn into a motionless target. The idea is reasonable and has a right to exist. On the other hand, to get the functionality of a light tank / infantry fighting vehicle without landing and in the dimensions and price tag of the MBT is strange to say the least. In my opinion, the T-14 / T-15 bunch is much better.
    Of course, the Terminator demonstrated its potential in Syria - such a Shilka-overgrowth. For certain TVDs, that’s it. Most likely, the RF Ministry of Defense will acquire a small series (brigade?) For operations where the use of tanks is excessive.
  13. Sands Careers General
    Sands Careers General 20 March 2018 10: 53
    +2
    Run in Syria, the first and second Terminator, decided to take into service. The idea is sound.
    And yes, in the second AG-17D no.
    Algeria has already ordered more than 300 pieces))
  14. Siberia 9444
    Siberia 9444 20 March 2018 13: 58
    0
    The good news is, it’s time to have a technique for covering tanks
  15. Hiller
    Hiller 21 March 2018 00: 03
    0
    I would like to understand how they plan to use this miracle weapon? In the staff of which unit? What combat charter will be guided by?
  16. Grigory_45
    Grigory_45 22 March 2018 16: 23
    0
    BIP PS FSB RF,
    Quote: BIP PS FSB RF
    I see no reason to pour from empty to empty

    Yeah, "there is my opinion and the wrong")
    Quote: BIP PS FSB RF
    I stated my position and gave links to the explanations of specialists above

    Of course set out by citing a broken link. And most of all, the expression “position outlined” is most pleasing - henceforth, linking is an expression of one’s opinion? laughing
  17. rtutaloe
    rtutaloe 4 May 2018 23: 50
    0
    The main problem of these Terminators in my opinion is the impossibility of combating the missiles of modern RPGs, ATGMs and various aircraft. The guns rise in the module by only 45 degrees. But this is more a module problem than, in general, BMPT ideas. It was high time to make such a machine. But it must be equipped with active protection against modern types of RPGs, such as the same Jewelin and his analogues. Moreover, so that he could not only protect himself, but also neighboring tanks. Then, paired with a tank, this would be the perfect combination. BMPT would destroy not armored targets, but an armored tank. BMPT would protect the tanks from the defeat of ATGMs and RPGs of recent generations. Would fight with helicopters and their guided missiles. Rather, a module similar to the module from the Shell, but not anti-aircraft, would be better here. Or you need to create a similar machine, the task of which will be to protect your combat units from controlled weapons of the enemy, so that it is the third in this formation, well, along the way, fight the enemy infantry.