Military Review

"Tank killer": Russia showed the new version of the BMPT "Terminator"

33
Uralvagonzavod published a video of testing a new version of a support combat vehicle tanks "Terminator 2". It is in this form that the BMPT should go into service with the Russian army. As previously reported, the Terminators should take part in the Victory Parade on May 9 of this year.


All 10 first machines are in 99% availability. It remains only to install launch containers for ATGM.

"Terminator-2" is based on the T-90 tank. The machine is armed with two 30-mm guns 2А42, 7,62-mm PKTM machine gun, four 9М120-1 "Attack" missiles, and also two AGS-17 grenade launchers.

BMPT is able to effectively deal with enemy manpower, light and heavy armored vehicles, as well as hit low-flying aerial objects such as UAVs or helicopters.

Last year, the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation reported that "Terminator" gained combat experience in the Syrian conflict.

33 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Forcecom
    Forcecom 21 March 2018 11: 10
    +1
    Without containers, the ATGM somehow looks “netak”.
  2. Sonet
    Sonet 21 March 2018 11: 22
    +5
    Why make a combat module so high like a swing? You couldn’t make it like a tower? And yes, it looks strange without missiles — they would have put two more Maxims there. And what about the infantry is the thing.
    I think even Shilka is more effective than this pepelats. In general, one question.
    1. Forcecom
      Forcecom 21 March 2018 11: 42
      +1
      Well, it’s written that the containers have not yet been mounted, I mean that their absence hurts my eyes a lot, we could attach at least weight dimensions for shooting the video
    2. Romka47
      Romka47 21 March 2018 11: 53
      +3
      This is why it is more effective?
    3. Nick
      Nick April 9 2018 13: 45
      +1
      Quote: Sonet
      they would have put two more Maxims there. And what is the opposite of infantry?

      There PKTM is installed. The cartridge is the same as that of Maxim 7,62x54R. It is both easier and easier to maintain.
  3. Razvedka_Boem
    Razvedka_Boem 21 March 2018 11: 24
    +4
    I remember how many copies the commentators broke when there were articles about the BMPT and their dispatch to Syria.
    Experience has shown their effectiveness, skeptics are confounded.
  4. Radikal
    Radikal 21 March 2018 12: 03
    +3
    Quote: Razvedka_Boem
    I remember how many copies the commentators broke when there were articles about the BMPT and their dispatch to Syria.
    Experience has shown their effectiveness, skeptics are confounded.

    Where it is shown, is there specific information on the results of the application? wassat
    1. Razvedka_Boem
      Razvedka_Boem 21 March 2018 12: 38
      +5
      Where it is shown, is there specific information on the results of the application? wassat

      Confirm the approval first ..)
      They decided to adopt them after the break-in in Syria. If you have questions what yes how, please contact the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation.
      1. Aleks2048
        Aleks2048 21 March 2018 20: 54
        +5
        And here I do not agree. Since they started advertising, you need to confirm it.
        And so it turns out that we are simply saving the Uralvagonzavod from bankruptcy. An experimental batch of fittings. An experimental batch of terminator. A little bit of capacity to modernize the tank fleet of the Russian Federation. However, they are pumping money into the plant and not small ... budget money ... So the question arises: who is the final beneficiary of this plant? What happened to the previous one, as practice shows, inefficient plant management? The rest of the questions are not even decent to voice, but the main one in the language directly spins where the money previously issued from the budget ?! am
        And as for the product itself, there are a lot of questions where exactly are they planning to stick it on the battlefield? What about the concept of modern use of tanks and their support?
        1. mac789
          mac789 21 March 2018 23: 50
          +1
          "... where exactly on the battlefield are they planning to stick it? ..."
          Oil painting ... The infantry squad moves on the battlefield on foot behind the tank. ATGM or grenade flies into the tank. DZ or KAZ works.
          Attention Question!?!?
          How many infantrymen from this squad will remain safe and sound in this case?
          Who else does not understand why BMPT is needed ??? ...
          1. Aleks2048
            Aleks2048 22 March 2018 11: 53
            +2
            And here we come to the main and uncomfortable question. Price tag per person. How much does a soldier cost in a squad and is its price comparable to soulless iron? In my opinion, recent wars have been waged because of money, or of any material assets, resources that can be expressed in money, and the war has become a commercial event, and from here it’s quite appropriate to put a price tag on a person. And the question arises: is the terminator cheaper, for example, a platoon of motorized infantry on an infantry fighting vehicle? It is necessary to take into account not only the combat value, but maintenance, repairs, food for the soldiers, delivery to the place of military operations, etc., of course, I’m not sure, but in urban combat, where the ATGM poses the maximum danger to the MBT, the mobility of infantry and infantry fighting vehicles it may turn out to be a decisive factor in favor of abandoning BMPT, and if you take an offensive or defense on a plain or forest belt, then again the scenario with the infantrymen operating incorrectly around the tank is unpleasant, but let's see another oil picture of an air raid dropping a cluster anti-tank bomb and how you have a chance?
            So the question is completely idle where to stick BMPT on the battlefield? The question is even more interesting: what is cheaper than BMPT and its defense, and also the possible loss or platoon of motorized infantry and infantry fighting vehicles with the same possibility of losing fighters and the BMP itself?
            Anyone who considers immoral the assessment in terms of money of human life and its comparison with soulless iron is it time to leave the club of noble maidens and just ask any commander that he would like to have an invaluable fighter, tank, plane on the battlefield?
            1. MoJloT
              MoJloT 22 March 2018 12: 44
              +1
              This is a matter of tactics, the interaction of infantry and tanks. The issue is being successfully resolved, for example, by the same Israel. In addition, if an infantry squad or something else flies into the infantry tank you will not envy it anyway + in case of detonation, the BC will be even worse than the KAZ will work !!!
            2. mac789
              mac789 23 March 2018 06: 16
              +2
              Price tag per person ... Or price tag on a weapon ...
              Nikolai the First also considered rifled guns and steamers unreasonably expensive ...
              He paid for the Crimean War for his arithmetic.
            3. mac789
              mac789 23 March 2018 06: 24
              +1
              First BMPT faster and more secure than the infantry squad.
              Secondly. Destruction of the infantry squad covering the MBT is a disruption to the performance of a combat mission. A combat mission can turn out to be like a whim of some sort of moron in uniform ... And with Thermopylae ...
              1. Days
                Days 25 March 2018 20: 27
                +1
                Thirdly: the current situation in the world leads to the fact that Russia gets an adversary who has mobilization potential many times or even an order of magnitude higher. This is either the PRC, or NATO, or, in the "bright" future, India (as it continues to drift toward the United States). With such opponents, the value of human life grows immeasurably, and a soulless piece of iron is in any case cheaper.
          2. tchoni
            tchoni 27 March 2018 08: 03
            +1
            Quote: mac789
            "... where exactly on the battlefield are they planning to stick it? ..."
            Oil painting ... The infantry squad moves on the battlefield on foot behind the tank. ATGM or grenade flies into the tank. DZ or KAZ works.
            Attention Question!?!?
            How many infantrymen from this squad will remain safe and sound in this case?
            Who else does not understand why BMPT is needed ??? ...

            Now imagine the same picture, but the infantry squad is moving behind the tank in a heavy armored personnel carrier hung with the same dz, and even with the possibility for each infantryman to observe the battlefield and use their own personal weapons.
            1. konstantin68
              konstantin68 April 28 2018 10: 31
              0
              Quote: tchoni
              but the infantry squad moves behind the tank in a heavy armored personnel carrier hung with the same dz, and even with the possibility for each infantryman to observe the battlefield and use their own personal weapons.

              And what enemy enemy infantry will you "clean" out of the trenches? Also a special heavy machine?
        2. URAL72
          URAL72 22 March 2018 13: 30
          +2
          UVZ is now a state-owned JSC with private capital. The machine is very necessary, for example, in our Donbass, and in the Kuril Islands and other parts of the coastal defense, it is not interchangeable.
        3. Days
          Days 25 March 2018 20: 21
          0
          Quote: Alex2048
          And here I do not agree. Since they started advertising, you need to confirm it.

          Advertising for potential customers. I am sure that for them there are videos from Syria. Which will not be made public at least in the near future. Just like some shows and shows of modern technology are held behind closed doors.
  5. Radikal
    Radikal 21 March 2018 13: 07
    +2
    Quote: Razvedka_Boem
    Where it is shown, is there specific information on the results of the application? wassat

    Confirm the approval first ..)
    They decided to adopt them after the break-in in Syria. If you have questions what yes how, please contact the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation.

    Whoever needs it, the forms of my admission are known, and you seem to have read the open press and put the winning posts! wassat tongue
    1. Observer2014
      Observer2014 21 March 2018 19: 13
      +4
      Radikal
      Whoever needs it, the forms of my admission are known, and you seem to have read the open press and put the winning posts!

      Where it is shown, is there specific information on the results of the application?
      Why didn’t this device please you? I’m just for general development. And you can contemplate the home-made things in Syria. But this particular device made specifically for such wars you absolutely do not like. Why? I just want to know the reason and that's it. hi
      1. Aleks2048
        Aleks2048 21 March 2018 21: 46
        +1
        But this unit did not please at the cost of the issue. In fact, a new machine was developed on the platform from T90 or T72, which is not equal to the BMP according to the price tag. At the same time, the new machine does not increase survivability compared to MBT. In this case, the terminator is positioned as a tank support machine. According to the purpose, the main activity is the destruction of anti-tank systems and their calculations. Efficiency against a helicopter in general raises only questions. In addition, the crew of the terminator exceeds the crews of protected MBT. Low mobility restrictions imposed by its platform. But the problem is that it is not clear how many such terminators are needed for the full protection of a tank unit in offensive or defense. What will MBT do on the battlefield in the presence of ATGM terminators? How would I understand that BOPS from the MBT arsenal is more effective than ATGM against MBT. But too few foreign MBTs are protected by active armor.
        1. Observer2014
          Observer2014 21 March 2018 22: 05
          +1
          Aleks2048
          And this unit did not please the question. In fact, a new machine was developed on the platform from T90 or T72,
          I thought so. Old Soviet thinking. I don’t give a damn about the price of the question. Our guys got a cool support car. Besides, I’ll add a new KAZ to it. Let them fight. Vesch !!! good soldier Just a necessary car ..
          1. Aleks2048
            Aleks2048 22 March 2018 12: 18
            0
            You can’t just spit on money like that. Money is what almost all wars are waged for. We saw examples of a war without money, but you can count them almost on the fingers of one hand. And from here the normal conclusion is that war is just a commercial event and in it price tags come to the fore. So it’s quite possible to evaluate a person’s life in money. And for all those who consider it immoral, I suggest starting to take away all the money that was awarded to the relatives of the victims, including all kinds of crash incidents and other things, under the pretext that life is priceless and we better offend the dead together with money. I think that relatives will quickly explain the need for the monetary expression of human life. Those who are not satisfied with this option can be asked differently (of course, this option has a situational dependence to a greater extent, but still has the right to exist) so that the commander would like to have one soldier, one tank, one plane, and so on, and I think it is unlikely that someone from a business trip is ready to put an equal sign between a tank, an airplane and a fighter.
  6. Radikal
    Radikal 21 March 2018 22: 13
    +1
    Quote: Observer2014
    Aleks2048
    And this unit did not please the question. In fact, a new machine was developed on the platform from T90 or T72,
    I thought so. Old Soviet thinking. I don’t give a damn about the price of the question. Our guys got a cool support car. Besides, I’ll add a new KAZ to it. Let them fight. Vesch !!! good soldier Just a necessary car ..

    In order for the device to “please”, as you put it, I would like to see (which is unlikely), but at least hear when, where, in what conditions (time of day, weather, etc.) what was applied, what happened, and what not. Without technical details, and details. That's all. hi
    1. Observer2014
      Observer2014 21 March 2018 22: 37
      +1
      Radikal
      In order for the device to “please”, as you put it, I would like to see (which is unlikely), but at least hear when, where, in what conditions (time of day, weather, etc.) what was applied, what happened, and what not. Without technical details, and details. That's all
      Well then, let's wait hi
  7. Sergey Perfiliev
    Sergey Perfiliev 22 March 2018 06: 54
    0
    Against helicopters is doubtful.
  8. konstantin68
    konstantin68 22 March 2018 10: 16
    +1
    Quote: Sergey Perfiliev
    Against helicopters is doubtful.

    And you want him to fight with helicopters and infantry, and with artillery. And weak against drones, against tactical missiles ... This is not his business. This is a continuation of the concept of "trench cleaner", in relation to modern conditions and the realities of the battle. And this idea is not new, it is periodically encountered by countries participating in real hostilities. The effectiveness will be tested in practice, as I understand it, the series is not yet discussed. It should be so. Test the device, run it in, test it, release several samples and be ready (in a threatening period) for mass production.
  9. Stepych
    Stepych 22 March 2018 11: 06
    0
    and the machine guns from the Tunguska are too expendable to defeat enemy forces?

    These machine guns would mow everyone on the horizon. Well, there are too expendable, but there would be such a psychological effect that everyone would run away instantly.
  10. Fitratovich
    Fitratovich 22 March 2018 17: 39
    0
    It should have been called "Meat Grinder", Vinaigrette or Stuffer
  11. IQ12NHJ21az
    IQ12NHJ21az 22 March 2018 20: 01
    0
    The car is good. I think this is what was missing for street fighting. There are too many tanks. and BMP is too small. In Syria, BMPT was tried in urban battles and, according to information from open sources, proved to be very good. And instead of ATGMs in urban battles, you can install something like a "bumblebee."
  12. Berg berg
    Berg berg 25 March 2018 21: 58
    0
    In my opinion, this kind of drug was created by some kind of pest-perverts! To mutilate such a technique and make this papelats - type for their own and so come down! And why didn’t they raise the combat module another meter higher, such as they stole it from an armored personnel carrier and added this. And it’s not too weak to add on top of the tower an astronomical type dome with a telescope. Everyone would have shied away, suddenly there is a hyperboloid!
  13. Sergey824
    Sergey824 3 May 2018 23: 20
    0
    Good. But who will explain this set of weapons? Why two grenade launchers and 2 guns? Versions that 2 are better than 1 do not roll. Then they would take Shilka as a sample and set 4 trunks.