Military Review

Why do Russia "Centaurs"?

176
A serious controversy erupted over the fact that Russia acquired from Italy a pair of so-called wheeled tanks Centauro with 120 and 105 mm guns is going to acquire two more similar machines with 120 and 30 mm guns in the future. The first two units of Italian armored vehicles, as reported, have already been sent to one of the training grounds near Moscow, where vehicles must pass a whole range of tests.



If we talk about the characteristics of Centauro, they are as follows: the crew of the vehicle is 4 man, from weapons - in addition to the gun, 2 machine guns (caliber 7,62), power reserve Centauro - 800 km / h, maximum speed - 110X4, length 4 m hull, 7,4 m width, warlike curb weight - about 2,94 tons. Today, this technique is made by the Italian company Oto Melara, part of the CIO production group. In service with the Italian army are 24,8 hundreds of such armored vehicles. It is reported that Russia is going to buy a license from Italian manufacturers in order to start producing Centauro at the KamAZ plant in Naberezhnye Chelny.

Of course, the name "tank" for this unit of armored vehicles can be used with great stretch. Italians themselves call the car a wheeled tank destroyer. At the same time, the initial development of the Centauro samples was made in the 80s of the last century. In this regard, to say that the machine is modern, is also possible, perhaps, with a big stretch. Moreover, military experts claim that the Italian “tank” has, to put it mildly, little solid armor. Even during the execution of peacekeeping operations in Africa, it became clear that the armor of the “Centaurs” easily penetrates even from heavy machine gun DShK and DShKM. RPG successfully opposed the Italian armored vehicles. True, the next-generation cars were equipped with enhanced armor, but this also did not become a panacea.

If we talk about Centauro as possible main vehicles of the Russian army in operations in the conditions of the city (in the future, of course), then specialists are sure that they (the “Centaurs”) will be ideal targets. The fault is precisely the main weak point of the Italian “tanks” - armor, which is hardly suitable for the very concept of “tank”.

But if so, why did the Ministry of Defense need to purchase these armored vehicles, and even rely on obtaining a license for their mass production? There are several considerations on this score.

First, a contract was already concluded with Italian firms for the production of armored vehicles “Lynx” in Voronezh (the Italian name is IVECO LMV M65 Lynx). That is, a bet is made on those partners with whom it is quite convenient to negotiate and conduct well-coordinated work. By the way, the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation plans to supply 57 "Ryysya" to the troops already this year (according to the available data, not a single one has been delivered yet ...)

Secondly, some experts, including the head of the Center for Military Forecasting, Anatoly Tsyganok, think that the purchase of Italian equipment is a new, well-established corruption scheme. In his opinion, it is much easier to launder money abroad than to openly purchase military equipment from Russian manufacturers.

Thirdly, the Ministry of Defense specifically focuses on the purchase of not the most reliable "Centaurs", with the goal of making serious upgrades and get, let's say, a new version of armored vehicles, which would be ideal for use in the Russian conditions, including and in terms of use in the North Caucasus.

All these three versions, undoubtedly, have the right to exist. Procurement of military equipment from foreign manufacturers, in principle, consistent with the strategy of the Ministry - to buy prototypes abroad and adopt advanced Western technology. Another thing is that the case with the same wheeled "tank" Centauro, it is difficult to call the "advanced development." It turns out that the Italian development 80-x, according to the Russian buyers, the potential is much greater than that of similar versions of Russian armored vehicles. Why not buy the French version of the Vextra-105 armored vehicle to the Russian military? After all, the military doctrine of Russia, apparently, shifted to the use of wheeled "tanks" in a number of operational actions. Especially since this particular model (Vextra-105) is today considered the best of its kind.

It turns out that Russian military buyers are not looking for easy ways ... And this again leads to the version of Anatoly Gypsy about a certain underwater part of the Russian-Italian contract iceberg.

However, there is another opinion about the use of the Italian "Centaurs" by Russia. This opinion is expressed, for example, by retired Colonel Viktor Murakhovsky, an expert in the field of armored vehicles. He is sure that no contracts for licensed and mass production of Centauro in Russia should be concluded. The fact is that Russian military manufacturers may need only experience in creating a unified platform for domestic armored vehicles. After that, applications were received from representatives of the public council at the Ministry of Defense. It was stated that as long as the prospect of the transaction is not assessed by the expert council of the Military Industrial Commission, there is no question of acquiring a license for the production of "Centaurs" in Russia.

It remains to wait for the end of the test of Italian equipment and whether the Russian Defense Ministry is really going to buy a license from the Italians for the serial production of wheeled "tanks" in Tatarstan.
Author:
176 comments
Ad

Subscribe to our Telegram channel, regularly additional information about the special operation in Ukraine, a large amount of information, videos, something that does not fall on the site: https://t.me/topwar_official

Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Redpartyzan
    Redpartyzan 14 May 2012 09: 00
    +28
    A very strange decision. Of course, the purchase of foreign equipment can be very useful. Recall a tank with Christie pendant bought from the Americans in the 30s and using his technical know-how Koshkin created the best tank of World War II. But why buy mediocre foreign equipment? We have our bulk! If you adopt something, then only the best.
    1. Fullback
      Fullback 14 May 2012 09: 51
      +21
      Horror. If the Ministry of Defense decides to purchase these devices, then this will be quiet horror. Spare parts, shells for guns, even fuels and lubricants will have to be purchased abroad. And what will happen to them in case of war, I think, it’s not worth discussing. Even in the case of deep modernization (in particular: replacing guns and machine guns, an engine, electronics), it is much easier and more profitable (for the Country) to buy one.
      1. Tjumenec72
        Tjumenec72 14 May 2012 10: 00
        +21
        By the way, our "centaur"

        2S14 "STING-C" (chassis BTR-70)
        1. Splin
          Splin 14 May 2012 10: 17
          +7
          Sting-C "is much worse as a tank destroyer. The gun is not on a par with the British 105-mm in terms of armor penetration. And you can't put a larger caliber in this wheeled vehicle because of the rear-engined layout. When it was created in the mid-70s, it may have made sense, but now the vehicle must be universal, which is why it is called a light tank.
          But where are they going to push the Centaur ?. Probably only to the landing forces. The wheelbase makes sense. It is cheaper and simpler than tractors in everything.
          1. ward
            ward 14 May 2012 11: 37
            +10
            On the manufacturer’s website ... the car is designed to operate mainly along freeways ... like this, war is war, but you can’t spoil the road ....
            1. Opertak
              Opertak 15 May 2012 17: 59
              +4
              Quote: ward
              like this, war is war, but you cannot spoil the road ....


              Ward, it seems to me that you hit the very spot! "Centaurs" are not intended for war and the army acts only as an intermediate link, covering the true purpose of this purchase. "Centaurs" will "serve" in the internal troops, while our "network hamsters" and other "anxious citizens" do not have grenade launchers and are not expected in the near future. I think so.
          2. Krilion
            Krilion 15 May 2012 12: 28
            +2
            Quote: Splin
            But where are they going to push the Centaur ?.


            I think that the habitat of centaurs will be limited to the territory of the North Caucasus ... there they are just right ...
          3. asavchenko59
            asavchenko59 16 May 2012 09: 07
            0
            These creatures are preparing for urban battles and they will probably go to the police.
        2. mars6791
          mars6791 14 May 2012 12: 12
          +9
          Indeed, the first thought that this centaur saw, and why not put a tower on the tank from our tank, is probably right that this is again some kind of money laundering scheme.
    2. Tjumenec72
      Tjumenec72 14 May 2012 09: 55
      +10
      In my opinion, everything is trite - the artificial creation of competition to lower the price of the Boomerang.
      1. radikdan79
        radikdan79 14 May 2012 10: 36
        +4
        in principle, why not? only the prestige of the state suffers ...
        1. Esso
          Esso 14 May 2012 20: 09
          +12
          Here is another article!
          Outdated Italian Cold War Centaur wheeled tanks will replace Russian T-90s?
          “Why does the Russian army need an obsolete Italian wheeled tank“ Centaur ”? That was the name of the material published by Vestnik Mordovii in March this year. Since none of the officials explained to us why our army needed this, in fact, an obsolete machine, we decided entirely repeat our material.
          The Italian armored vehicles Iveco LMV M65, which received the Russian designation "Lynx", are beginning to enter service with the Russian army. However, it is surprising that along with relatively modern technology, the Italians do not lose hope of selling us something like a makeweight in the form of "ancient" Iveco VM 90 and obsolete B1 "Centauro" tank destroyers.
          It was reported that we will test this heavy armored car, and perhaps even a small batch of such vehicles will be purchased.
          As a rule, the acquisition of Western equipment from us is justified by the fact that, supposedly, Russian analogues are behind, and we have the opportunity to get acquainted with advanced Western technologies.
          If we are talking about such machines as the "Lynx" or the BMP "Frezcia", then perhaps the machines, in fact, may be of interest to our military engineers, but what is unusual about the "Centaur"?
          This combat vehicle began to be created in the first half of the 80s, as a tank destroyer. But even then, what kind of tanks could the Centaur fight? Only with Bulgarian and Yugoslavian T-55s, obsolete Albanian "Type 59". After all, it was on this old that the armored "man-horse" was sharpened, arming it with a 105-mm gun.
          Against the more modern T-72 and M-84, this gun was powerless in the frontal projection, and could disable tanks only when it hit the side. Serbian tankers laughed when, during the conflict in Kosovo, they learned that they were to fight these wheeled sub-tanks. Their 125-mm guns could be flashed through B1, as booking this 24-ton (!) Armored vehicle does not hold small-caliber shells larger than 25 mm. A good target even for our old BMP-2.
          The Centaur is also defenseless against RPG-7 rounds, even the most outdated ones. It has very weak mine protection.
          Of no interest is the fire control system installed on it. It was created using the element base almost 30 years ago. Domestic sights are many times more modern. For example, in our fire control systems, target tracking machines are used. Plus, there is the possibility of firing guided missiles. Italians have none of this.
          Yes, the armored car has good mobility, on the highway it easily gives out over a hundred km / h, but if you use this car in the so-called "medium brigades", where now, basically, floating wheeled armored vehicles, this BA will need special means of overcoming water obstacles ...
          We have already written that an excellent wheeled tank could be made on the basis of the BTR-90, which, thanks to its 125-mm cannon, had excellent firepower, moreover, its mobility characteristics would be no worse than that of the Centaur. , in addition, he could swim.
          But the base in the form of the BTR-90 was recognized as unpromising, but they suddenly became interested in the "advanced" Cold War era Italian armored vehicle technology, which, in fact, is currently only suitable for peacekeeping operations.
          But should the Russian armed forces only prepare for peacekeeping operations?
          1. lotus04
            lotus04 15 May 2012 20: 45
            +2
            Quote: Esso
            "Why does the Russian army need an obsolete Italian wheeled tank" Centaur "?


            Who watched Putin’s inauguration? Have you seen Berlusconi there? Here is the answer!
    3. Gurza
      Gurza 14 May 2012 10: 34
      +7
      If you adopt something, then only the best.

      And who said that they will sell it to us?
      Most likely bought for the interaction of technology. We will wait for the news
      1. alex13st
        alex13st 14 May 2012 14: 27
        +12
        For the umpteenth time, and not only on this resource, when discussing this news, I hear a phrase about technology. For me, technology is a technological process, i.e. it's not a question of what to do, but how. And the answer to this question is the production processes, what to do and how to get the necessary materials from which it will be done. Hence, it follows that it is necessary to buy not outdated samples, in which most likely nothing that we already know is implemented (especially since they themselves have an outstanding engineering school), but technological lines and processes. A simple analysis to the cogs will not give an idea of ​​how to do this in a "killed" production, even if the principle of operation is clear. But the technologies themselves will not be sold to us. Nobody canceled the competition yet.
        So the technology is bought wrong. More like another profit and sabotage, because The prestige of the defense industry in the global market will quickly fall.
        And by the way - why do we need such officials who cannot establish a dialogue with their defense industry, if this is their direct responsibility?
        1. slvevg
          slvevg 18 May 2012 00: 43
          0
          Not in the eyebrow, but in the eye !! good
      2. slvevg
        slvevg 18 May 2012 00: 39
        0
        Hello! I admit, also, that many (but not all) purchases of overseas military and special equipment are carried out or planned as an element of a policy of pushing Russia's interests in a certain direction by contracting countries (now it’s bad to have money in Europe). Having received an order for the Mistrals, Sarkozy must work out ... WAS. Plus the technology of interest struck. It's time to drive a stake into the crotch of European integration ... Until we transfer the game to their field, it is a sin to count on speedy success.
    4. Jackyun
      Jackyun 14 May 2012 10: 51
      +11
      Quote: Redpartyzan
      If you adopt something, then only the best

      I ask you not to forget that in this case we are dealing with a NATO member state. Although, any state will not give up its advanced developments, especially in the military field. As follows from the article, the Ministry of Defense purchased single instances for the purpose of testing them. You gave a good example of acquiring foreign military equipment (for the same purpose, by the way). The instance you named is also not the best, and it was not purchased for Koshkin. However, Koshkin found a rational kernel in him and the result is known. We build the best helicopters in the world, but the first real samples came from Germany. Pretty raw, not reliable, etc., but the result is also evident.
      In the specimen in question, there is undoubtedly a grain of truth that, when added to our rich experience in tank building, will give a positive result.
      I believe that one should not look everywhere and in everything for the machinations of corrupt officials, incompetent generals and, in general, start a witch hunt. Judge for yourself, gentlemen, if everything was so bad, disgusting and rotting, as some figures try to imagine, including at this forum, we would have long ago fed a foreign army and NATO soldiers walked the streets of our cities. However, they are not and are not expected even in the most distant future.
      Let us love and respect our army, the country and ourselves in it.
      1. Kars
        Kars 14 May 2012 13: 06
        +2
        From the chassis of Christie to the T-34 --- it was too expensive, long and costly. Plus flooded the Red Army Beshkami who became outdated instantly after 1936.
        1. wown
          wown 14 May 2012 17: 29
          0
          is it BT ?????? BT 7 and 41 was not an old car !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 1940 year of development. learn materiel sir
          1. Kars
            Kars 14 May 2012 17: 34
            +3
            Quote: wown
            BT 7

            And BT 7 is also a stillborn model built without taking into account the experience of the Spanish war.
            So learn the mat part, and you won’t have to put so many question marks.
            And start a German unit and two deuce --- look at the number of crew and the radio.
    5. AER_69
      AER_69 14 May 2012 11: 03
      +4
      Hedgehog it is clear that there is something in these centaurs that our armored personnel carriers really need! It cannot be otherwise! But they aren’t fools, as many people think for some reason!
      1. Dust
        Dust 14 May 2012 11: 10
        +7
        it’s clear that they are not fools, but simple traitors to national interests!
        An older clunker was not found for purchase?
        Serious experience - to drive monkeys in Africa ...
        1. surkov
          surkov 14 May 2012 12: 19
          +10
          Gentlemen, the question probably lies not in the "Centaur" itself, but in Putin's special relationship with the laughing stock of all Europe, Berlussconi. Somewhere here it is probably necessary to look for the roots of such a strange cooperation between the Russian and Italian military-industrial complex. By the way, Medvedev's wife also rested in a VIP-hotel in Tuscany, strange isn't it? It would be better if she would hit the road to Baikal or Valdai and look at her homeland! Ato all of Europe and America, somehow it does not come out slightly patriotic ... laughing
        2. Yoshkin Kot
          Yoshkin Kot 14 May 2012 14: 45
          0
          Yeah, DDT knows better who the traitor laughing
    6. Skiff
      Skiff 14 May 2012 12: 24
      +6
      There is another opinion that our army is customized to the NATO standard, and for this, think for yourself. sad
      1. Viking
        Viking 14 May 2012 13: 29
        +5
        What is customized? Specifically? This is called heard ringing, but I don’t know where he is. The main standardization in the NATO bloc is the main small arms (single caliber) and communications. So what is the so-called fit. We bought 4 pieces - to see, well, that's right. India generally won out and produces its weapons from completely different countries.
    7. pinachet
      pinachet 14 May 2012 12: 37
      +4
      Yes, you're right about Koshkin, he worked with the American Shashi Kristi, and the output was t 34. (A t26 is a copy of the English Vickers tank) there are many examples in the anti-aircraft artillery, and even for the first moment 15 there were a Royce engines.
      maybe the same options are taking place now, they will buy a drive, look and do their own thing.
    8. Stepa5625024.
      Stepa5625024. 14 May 2012 16: 03
      +1
      Russia is obliged to create innovations in military armaments as it will be available in the future and this will significantly affect the country's economy
    9. Rustam
      Rustam 15 May 2012 11: 28
      +2
      Guess the guys !!!
      author initially wrong first sentence
      -that Russia purchased a couple of so-called Centauro wheeled tanks from Italy — DON’T PURCHASE AND TAKE 2 SAMPLES FOR TESTING — THAT'S HERE BAD ??? AT LEAST LOOK AT THEM AND COMPARED WITH AMZ PRODUCTS
      I think this is a plus, I also know that AMZ representatives will be present at the trials, as the Boomerang program will move forward
      The 2-centaur is not very interesting for me, the old machine, most of all I am interested in 2 more samples that will come - this is FREDIA, you can take a look at them - not a bad device http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N_C3bvkA3WA
      3-KAMAZ will not do this - it cannot be, it is an American plant and Americans will not be allowed, as they were not allowed with LMV

      ps-I SEE ONLY PLUSES ESPECIALLY FOR AMZ -that you can compare these devices, They still want competition, etc.

      pictured France in AFGHANISTAN
  2. andrey903
    andrey903 14 May 2012 09: 01
    +38
    The centaur is the same BTR-80 with a gun. It is strange that the number of Italian armored vehicles Lynx roughly coincides with the number of generals, and the number of light helicopters with the number of colonel general
    1. Pablomc
      Pablomc 14 May 2012 09: 08
      +6
      andrey903,

      Bravo :)))))))
      1. itr
        itr 14 May 2012 11: 15
        +6
        Andrew 903 you look Damn wow! so here half of the weapons on the site do not understand
        An armored personnel carrier with a gun is just a bomb
    2. Viking
      Viking 14 May 2012 13: 31
      +3
      And for the reservation, also for the engine, for the placement of the crew - is this the same BTR-80? Or is it you in appearance as a specialist identified?
    3. PSih2097
      PSih2097 14 May 2012 17: 02
      +4
      Lynx roughly coincides with the number of generals, and the number of light helicopters with the number of colonel general

      so we have to put them all there and test to blow up a mine of 8 Kg of TNT ...
  3. Victor
    Victor 14 May 2012 09: 06
    +10
    In this case, we can only build hypotheses. It takes some time, and we will all see why these purchases were actually made, for business or for theft.
  4. itr
    itr 14 May 2012 09: 15
    -2
    No tank no armored personnel carrier one word centaur! wink
    1. Ruswolf
      Ruswolf 14 May 2012 09: 52
      +5
      No tank no armored personnel carrier one word centaur!

      No legs!
      And this, judging by the name, is not a significant refinement!
      So we decided to make sure that it doesn’t go - but it rides!
    2. Reddragon
      Reddragon 14 May 2012 10: 06
      +10
      According to the classification, this is an artillery anti-tank installation, or rather: a self-propelled anti-tank gun. In Russia there is an analogue: 2С28 (Octopus-K), you can still 2С23 (Nona-SVK)
      1. Ruswolf
        Ruswolf 14 May 2012 11: 25
        +3
        self-propelled anti-tank gun


        Well, I’m saying that I have to go! And they are all cool! Rides!
        1. Vyalik
          Vyalik 14 May 2012 18: 39
          0
          But it is intended for battles along roads and motorways. If along ours, then it will not last long.
          1. Vingetor
            Vingetor 15 May 2012 06: 23
            0
            hmm, why did you get the idea that she will travel around the country with us ?? maybe just for European roads ?? did not think?)
  5. Alexander Romanov
    Alexander Romanov 14 May 2012 09: 15
    +9
    What is going on in the Ministry of Defense?!? God alone knows
    1. Ruswolf
      Ruswolf 14 May 2012 09: 59
      +6
      What is going on in the Ministry of Defense?!? God alone knows


      If only God knew - half of the defense industry already mastered the forestry industry somewhere in Siberia
    2. Vyalik
      Vyalik 14 May 2012 18: 41
      0
      Remember how they said in the puppet show "Divine Comedy" - one GOD knows, and maybe he does not know.
      1. sergey261180
        sergey261180 14 May 2012 20: 34
        +1
        Campaign God turned away from the defense. sad
  6. patriot2
    patriot2 14 May 2012 09: 17
    +5
    andrey903Well, you compared, class!
    I think that the proposed licensed assembly - a test ball of the type - will pass, the money laundering trick will not pass.
    Well, some technical solutions can be bought separately, in addition, the French have more advanced technologies.
    Well, take with such armor, and then make the car heavier - why?
    However, it is necessary to test it and not only the chassis, shoot with all types of small arms, pass through minefields, etc. And deeply analyze the result.
    Article +
  7. sergskak
    sergskak 14 May 2012 09: 23
    +2
    Somehow, versions about new technologies and a trusted partner sound not convincing. But in the version of Anatoly Tsygank there is common sense :(In his opinion, laundering money abroad is much simpler than openly purchasing military equipment from Russian manufacturers.)
    Yes, and more :(RGD grenades even more successfully resisted Italian armored vehicles.) !!! Maybe this is a typo, and what was meant by any RPG? About DShK it is clear, there are no questions.
  8. Svistoplyaskov
    Svistoplyaskov 14 May 2012 09: 28
    +15
    If the Italians need to thank something for the purchase of their equipment, then it would be better to buy a license for cabs for KAMAZ from IVECO.
    1. radikdan79
      radikdan79 14 May 2012 14: 59
      +3
      they already bought from Mercedes
  9. DUTCH
    DUTCH 14 May 2012 09: 31
    -2
    The author of the article is inadequate, got to the bottom of the word "tank", write fairy tales for children!
    Of course, if we ourselves can’t, we must buy to study and do it ourselves. The whole world does this, I don’t understand why our hype rises every time, if our hands grow from the wrong place!
    1. Nova
      Nova 14 May 2012 09: 46
      +4
      I agree with your opinion. We bought it clearly for study, in order to later refine it, adapt it to our requirements and realities, and make our own sample.
      1. core
        core 14 May 2012 10: 56
        0
        the author is just hysterical. the article is not valid. zero analysis of the use of this technique, some insults that financial flows pass him by.
      2. kostya
        kostya 14 May 2012 18: 20
        +2
        the main thing is that such crap is not purchased in large quantities, I think the domestic counterpart in times cheaper, and the massive purchase of weapons abroad is just a money laundering
  10. radikdan79
    radikdan79 14 May 2012 09: 32
    +10
    really, at least a strange decision. if everything is "... the fact is that Russian military manufacturers may only need experience in creating a unified platform for domestic armored vehicles ...", then why not buy more modern samples (after all, "Centauro" 30 years ago is not suitable as a role model). and more modern samples (Iveco LMV), as it turned out, do not have advantages over domestic developments ...
    Conclusions suggest themselves:
    -or problems with the development of the multipurpose platform "Boomerang" forced the Ministry of Defense to take such a step (which is unlikely, after all, the military-industrial complex still has technical potential and smart heads);
    -or corruption in the army continues to blossom and smell (then it really is time to equate it (corruption) to treason to the Motherland) ...
  11. Splin
    Splin 14 May 2012 09: 36
    +7
    An army light wheeled tank is needed, but only as a fire support vehicle! As a tank destroyer, he became obsolete in the 90s. Therefore, it is better to have something like NONA-CMS with a complex of PURs. And assemble your wheelbase, even with the BTR-90.
    The only thing for which the Centaur is needed is to study it in order to know the adversary (the Americans made the Stryker from the "Italian").
  12. Svistoplyaskov
    Svistoplyaskov 14 May 2012 09: 37
    +9
    Quote from the author:
    Why not then the Russian military department to purchase the French version of the Vextra-105 armored vehicle? ..... Especially since this particular model (Vextra-105) is today considered the best of its kind.


    Then it was just necessary to "persuade the French for free" as a bonus for what we bought from them Mitral!
  13. Kibb
    Kibb 14 May 2012 09: 37
    +3
    Really why? Light IT never before seriously involved neither CA nor RA. Recall Sting and Octopus S.
    Wait, see
  14. Vanek
    Vanek 14 May 2012 09: 39
    +2
    Well, what makes "NONA" worse?
    1. Kibb
      Kibb 14 May 2012 10: 28
      +12
      Quote: Vanek
      Well, what makes "NONA" worse

      Nothing worse and worse. A completely different car.
      "All that is green and with a gun is a tank" S- my wife
      1. Splin
        Splin 14 May 2012 10: 33
        +6
        Not a tank, I need a MOS as a Stryker but with a big caliber
        1. Kibb
          Kibb 14 May 2012 11: 06
          +2
          I do not know whether it is necessary or not, but
          Quote: Splin
          Therefore, it is better to have something like NONA-CMS with a complex of PURs.
          any more interesting
  15. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
    Andrei from Chelyabinsk 14 May 2012 09: 50
    +25
    Dear commentators!
    I know very little about the modern armored vehicles, but I still tried to make some inquiries about this Centaur. Do not judge strictly - for what you bought, for what I sell.
    There are no analogues of such equipment either in the USSR or in Russia. Of course, not because we could not create something like this, but simply because no one saw the need for such machines.
    The Centaur's running gear is completely different from our armored personnel carriers. Not that it was fundamentally better or worse, it is just OTHER (just don’t ask me about the differences, I'm not special)
    In its class, the Centaur was the best machine (it seems to be the way they think in the world, it seems to be superior to the American Stryker, on which they have the Marines unzipped)
    So that's it. If we suddenly have a need for this kind of equipment (some kind of wheeled station wagon), then the nicest thing is not to order our own to develop from "0" but to buy a couple of Centaurs, run them in the test sites properly, see how successful their solutions are. we have not previously used it, and then supply the TK to domestic developers, taking into account the experience gained (and it will be easier for ours, having a Roman in front of our eyes). And get from the domestic military-industrial complex first-class military equipment of our own design, but taking into account the world experience in creating wheeled combat vehicles (if this is a tank, then I am a Japanese ballerina)
    The truth here is the question - why then take the Italian and not the Frenchman, who seems to be a newer and better Centaur?
    Perhaps the fact is that the Frenchman is not so easy to buy (some thread of technology is not sold with him in the kit, as it happened with Iveka), and without these technologies it is not so interesting to us. Or maybe it’s just priced (I want to remind you that French Rafali won a tender in India at a price of about 118 million dollars apiece or even higher - for that kind of money you could add 3 rubles and buy 2 American Super Hornet or 3 Mig- 35.
    In general, I propose to wait a moment to shout SHEFVSEPROPALOPROSRALIVEVsePOLIMERY and wait for the development of events
    1. radikdan79
      radikdan79 14 May 2012 10: 33
      +2
      that's exactly what they didn't see the need for such machines before. it was supposed to conduct battles on a wide front with the maximum use of tanks (it was not for nothing that the USSR at one time had more tanks than all of Europe). Now the tactics of battles have changed a lot - there is no front as such, most of the battles take place in settlements and suburbs, and partisan war is on the face. so there was a need for a highly maneuverable and well-armed vehicle. only the choice of the Italian car is not clear. after all, if necessary, it is possible to install a modern tank gun on the chassis of the same BTR-90 (by the way, such pictures often appear on the websites of military equipment). and there is nothing technically difficult, I suppose, in this. made on the extended chassis BMD-3 ACS "Sprut" (weighing 18-19 tons). and the developments on the same ACS 2S14 "Sting-S" will be useful ...
      and something unusual in the "Centaur" is not noticed ... hydropneumatic suspension? so in BMD it has been used for more than a decade, and the promising military-industrial complex "Wolf" is equipped with it; the ability to turn the rear wheels at speeds up to 20 km / h in addition to the front two pairs of wheels? so the same BTR-90 can turn in place like a tank ...
      oh, they’re cunning something in the Moscow Region, they’re not agreeing something ...
      1. Splin
        Splin 14 May 2012 10: 41
        +3
        All is correct. but it’s impossible to install a cannon in a rear-wheel wheeled vehicle as on an SPRUT. When fired, the muzzle will be so pranced. Here is a low-pulse large-caliber gun, it’s real.
        1. radikdan79
          radikdan79 14 May 2012 11: 05
          +5
          the French AMX-10RC also has a rear-engined layout, and the upgrade option provided for the installation of a 120 mm gun. and the "Sprut" uses the 2a75 gun, which is a slightly revised version of the 2a46 tank. the changes are connected, among other things, with the use of other recoil mechanisms, which made it possible to install such a powerful weapon on a light floating chassis (by the way, the Sprut also shoots afloat, albeit within 70 degrees of the heading).
          if you want, you can do ...
          1. Splin
            Splin 14 May 2012 12: 09
            +2
            The Frenchman was developed as a brone car with a 90 mm gun. And it was precisely due to the short 3-axle wheelbase that 105-mm could be pushed onto it. The alignment did not suffer much. But the more powerful 120 mm could not be delivered and developed machines with mid-engine layout. Despite the fact that when they put 105 on the AMX-10R, the car lost the ability to shoot on the move. Only from short stops. Even with a stabilizer.
      2. alebor
        alebor 14 May 2012 10: 42
        +3
        Maybe such a great interest in the technology of the "great" military power of Italy is explained by the friendly relations between Vladimir Putin and S. Berlusconi?
    2. Olegovich
      Olegovich 14 May 2012 10: 44
      +17
      Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
      In general, I suggest waiting for a shout

      I support. Moreover, why didn’t they shout when the Italians in our dear Soviet state built AvtoVAZ, the Volzhsky Pipe Plant for the currency, the French - the Volzhsky Organic Synthesis Plant, and before that the American technology Henry Ford (conveyor) and then GAZ?
      Even for the development of offshore fields, we do not have production technologies - now we are taking from the same Italians. For the production of mothballed and low-debit oil wells, only American reagents work.
      Conclusion: guys, do not need terry patriotism, do not hatred, where we do not have technology, we must take where they give. Because where WE WANT to take (concern Opel) - WE WILL NOT GIVE THEM!
      This is the West's policy of technological containment of Russia, which has not been canceled. Therefore, we need to climb out of our skin to "cut the corner"as Rogozin put it.
      And enough is already everywhere and everywhere to stick this rotten slogan-chant "all around washing the dough and kickbacks." Not all of them are corrupt, and the first results of rearmament of the army are convincing of the opposite.
      1. core
        core 14 May 2012 11: 03
        +6
        sober comment, plus for you.
      2. radikdan79
        radikdan79 14 May 2012 11: 12
        +2
        that's right, there is no technology - we will buy, without this there will be no further development. I think everyone understands this very well. But is Russia really lagging behind in technology so much that it is buying 25-year-old developments (and that is exactly how much Centaur is). or since no one will sell us new and promising developments, we will take what they give ?!
        1. core
          core 14 May 2012 11: 57
          +3
          25 years is not old age. are in service with s-300 do not tell me what year they are. 80s, 70s beech system. of the year. all our tanks are a deep modernization of the t72. and nothing normal tanks, no worse than others.
          1. Viking
            Viking 14 May 2012 13: 37
            +3
            And you can also recall the helicopter B-80. He is the Ka-50 later.
          2. radikdan79
            radikdan79 14 May 2012 14: 08
            +1
            and the Kalash is 65! I do not argue. only if you buy something new and promising. The cat cried new in the "centaur", but the promising one ... if you wish, you can also make a candy from the T-34, stuffed with modern electronics and equipment. only how much will it cost and is it necessary? that's the question.

            and I also invite everyone to consider and express their opinion about the "wheeled tanks" currently in service with the countries of the world, on their "+" and "-"? and at the same time see which of them is more promising
            1. Viking
              Viking 14 May 2012 14: 30
              0
              I believe that the thing is very promising. In the same convoys in Chechnya, as little as it quieted down, they preferred to use wheeled armored vehicles. It’s also supposed to be more stable undermining, the speed of movement is higher on the road surface, and even with 3 or better with 4 pairs of wheels and it should not move badly on the virgin land.
              1. Viking
                Viking 14 May 2012 14: 39
                +3
                And in order to deliver tanks to the place of conflict - for good, either rail transport or heavy vehicles — tank carriers — are required. I suspect about it, if a couple of tank regiments pass along the highway, no matter how good it is, it will remain only in memories. Wheel equipment is devoid of such a drawback.
                1. igor67
                  igor67 14 May 2012 19: 50
                  +1
                  34-122 Syrian Armed Forces
            2. igor67
              igor67 14 May 2012 16: 31
              +4
              radikdan79,
              t34-100 egyptian army
              1. igor67
                igor67 14 May 2012 19: 14
                +2
                and here is t34-122, 34ki-based self-propelled guns
              2. igor67
                igor67 14 May 2012 19: 41
                +2
                t34-122, Syrian aircraft

                the Cuban version of 34ki today
                1. Chicot 1
                  Chicot 1 14 May 2012 23: 07
                  +3
                  Respected igor67, this is not a "version 34ki", it is a 100-mm anti-aircraft artillery gun KS-19M2 based on the T-34-85 tank. and nothing more ... wink
                  By the way, KS-19 itself has very, very limited capabilities for firing at ground targets. This is due to the design of the gun itself with a separate (double) aiming at the sight ... The sight itself is quite simple ... In addition, manually loading can be done only with the horizontal position of the barrel. The breech is high, the weight of the shell with an HE-412 high-explosive fragmentation grenade is approx. 30 kage ... wassat
                  Total in the dry residue (discarding snot and emotions) - if you manage to make one aimed shot per minute on a ground target, then it will be simply gorgeous! .. laughing
                  From where do I know all this? .. And from my own experience. Communicated very closely with these guns while working in the avalanche service ... bully
                  1. igor67
                    igor67 14 May 2012 23: 45
                    0
                    Chicot 1,
                    Dear chicot! Just answering one of the members of the forum about upgrading t34, I found this option, in fact there are so many options on the basis of t34
                2. radikdan79
                  radikdan79 15 May 2012 11: 18
                  +1
                  thanks, igor67, something like that I had in mind laughing
      3. illarion
        illarion 14 May 2012 12: 19
        -2
        I will remind you who forgot, I was impressed by the maneuvers of the marines in the Far East - the armored personnel carrier couldn’t go ashore. Moreover, not one. We floundered like turtles. So, I need to do something
        1. Splin
          Splin 14 May 2012 12: 26
          +4
          And the Centaur will generally drown because it does not swim. For marines, such vehicles as Octopus-D and BMP-3 are needed. They are perfectly kept on the water and due to the caterpillar mover freely go ashore.
        2. Viking
          Viking 14 May 2012 13: 40
          +9
          You saw this in the pictures, in the same place where it was written that more than one missile did not hit the floating target? Conclusions were made on the basis of the fact that then this target was dragged to the port. Only the fact that they were shooting with inert charges and drowning it, in general, was not supposed to be, this "blocher" forgot to say and did not know for sure. Somewhere it was taken apart literally line by line. In general - a star and a provocation.
          1. lewerlin53rus
            lewerlin53rus 14 May 2012 22: 44
            +1
            Right. Here is this article: http: //topwar.ru/7123-razberem-zheltyachok.html
    3. borisst64
      borisst64 14 May 2012 11: 10
      +7
      The presence of medium-caliber troops on a car chassis is a necessity; the network of paved roads over the past decades has increased many times (at least in the European part).
      The BTR chassis is not suitable for such a layout technique, you need free space in the central part, for ammunition and the loading mechanism (or the volume for the loader to work, the shells are too big), the landing compartment is not needed.
      We don’t have to talk about booking, the carrying capacity of equipment is determined by the possibility of tires, and they are very small. Therefore, this technique will be sewn aboard with large-caliber machine guns, and with automatic guns and in the forehead.
    4. SSR
      SSR 14 May 2012 21: 12
      0
      Dear Andrey from Chelyabinsk, who is not special ... thank you for the most sensible and judicious comment.
  16. Nikaviz
    Nikaviz 14 May 2012 09: 50
    +4
    Apparently our design bureau will "have fun"
  17. CHIM SMOKE
    CHIM SMOKE 14 May 2012 09: 52
    +5
    What's the catch??? It's never too late to learn weapons and weapons and learn the best. But what if you have to fight on a trophy?
  18. Ridder
    Ridder 14 May 2012 09: 53
    -1
    Clear stump, money laundering fool , they’ll say they’ll buy 2 And then they will start mass production.
  19. Amur
    Amur 14 May 2012 10: 12
    +3
    2 times to buy in one place - this is a regularity.
    Perhaps we are witnessing the transfer of the washing machine to Sicily and the most important thing is not to find fault with anything, that’s what the experience of the mafioso means ...
    1. Schwanzer
      Schwanzer 14 May 2012 14: 17
      +5
      for minus one I’ll say separately, as soon as you see the official response of the MO regarding the procurement of the Centaurs, then we'll talk. Most likely we will not get any intelligible motivation. The fact that minus signers do not like the version of money laundering is from a lack of imagination. I personally believe in the disinterested motive of army officials when they tell me why the Mistrals are purchased and why the Lynx turned out to be better than the domestic samples?
      Therefore, Amur plus (+) to you.
  20. Ruswolf
    Ruswolf 14 May 2012 10: 16
    +3
    Someone says that we need samples for study, and that we have specials. there are no services anymore - they used to get everything!
    And why did the forcemen disperse - like a class - they also got everything.

    I support those who express the opinion that this is a money laundering, and already stolen.

    If the question was that this is carried out in the framework of the joint Russian-Italian development of the latest technology, then this would be more believable and similar to reality
    1. Yarbay
      Yarbay 14 May 2012 10: 23
      0
      I am pleased to plus you!
      funny excuse !!
      or in intelligence alone Chapmen ??
      And in order not to lose prestige, you could buy through a third country!
      1. Ruswolf
        Ruswolf 14 May 2012 11: 42
        +2
        Alibek
        Hello!

        Here the question is not shame, that's for sure!
        We boast that ahead of the rest in terms of development, how many projects and inventions are on the shelves, because of not financing projects ..........
        Wash it spit all the Russian engineers and designers of the defense industry
        1. Yarbay
          Yarbay 14 May 2012 12: 43
          +3
          Alekh!
          I think in prestige too, if you buy equipment from Italy, then who will buy from you ??
          it means officially recognize them as the best !!
          You can not do it this way!
          1. Viking
            Viking 14 May 2012 13: 45
            +1
            Equipment is usually bought based on tenders. So they choose it, test it, look at all the parameters, including the price and after-sales service.
      2. Viking
        Viking 14 May 2012 13: 44
        +2
        And what is the loss of prestige? In the purchase of single samples of equipment for study? This is what it is called - a competent position - to study, compare. And do not pout like a bubble - they say we have everything and so we don’t need to learn anything and learn from any experience.
        1. Ruswolf
          Ruswolf 14 May 2012 16: 00
          0
          And what is the loss of prestige? In the purchase of single samples of equipment for study? This is what it is called - a competent position - to study, compare.


          Is it not too expensive to easily study and compare?
        2. Yarbay
          Yarbay 14 May 2012 17: 18
          -3
          Viking!
          Read the comments of rusvolf, the answers are written there!
  21. radikdan79
    radikdan79 14 May 2012 10: 41
    +4
    and here is another representative of this family, but older ...
    AMX-10RC
  22. leon-iv
    leon-iv 14 May 2012 10: 49
    +17
    Explanations for the procurement of foreign equipment

    twower
    12 May, 23: 38
    Gave Victor Murakhovsky. Unfortunately, the group where the record is posted is closed, the link will not:

    *****

    Let me try, with the example of Centauro and Freccia, to once again clarify the real disposition in the military-industrial complex and the armed forces and their attitude to these processes. During the last 20 years, our defense industry complex realized the socio-economic "famine", with the exception of a few (on the fingers of one hand counted) export-oriented enterprises. They are easy to find online. As a result, out of approximately 3700 of defense companies located in the Russian Federation on 1991 a year, 2011 remained on 1759. Lost many dozens of scientific schools and hundreds of technologies. Not all of them were advanced, but, nevertheless, in the conditions of the Soviet isolation they were extremely important. Then came other times, it came to understand that the defense-industrial complex must be rescued urgently. This "rescue" was carried out by willed methods of hammering enterprises into holdings (today their 55) and often by methods very similar to "raiding." At 2012, the process is basically completed, although sometimes there are “exhausts”, such as being assigned to Bekkiyev’s “Constellation” concern or going under the control of the Northern Shipyards. Those individual excesses should be expected in the future.
    Until recently, global processes in the economy had little effect on the algorithms for R&D orders, which are familiar to all participants. The Ministry of Defense pretended to be "paying", the developers pretended to be "developing." Almost all the equipment that we see today in the troops, at parades, at exhibitions, was developed in the Soviet era and is often intended for completely different types of conflicts, other armies that are not relevant today and in the future. Under the previous conditions, the creation of fundamentally new models was fundamentally impossible, since the ordering system remained Soviet, the initiatives of enterprises (especially private ones!) Were not provided, and the ordering bodies of the Ministry of Defense were rapidly degrading in parallel with the defense industry. As a result, our developers have largely lost touch with reality. In Soviet times, this connection was ensured by the units of the scientific and technical intelligence of the GRU and the KGB, the participation of our military personnel in conflicts around the world. Now these channels have dried up. The world has changed radically. And our developers continue to boil in the familiar and convenient "gurgling" of the domestic swamp, into which our once advanced scientific and technical community has turned. It is easy to see this at international arms exhibitions, where we look like an "old-regime" oasis. At these exhibitions, with all the wretchedness of domestic expositions, our enterprises perceive our journalists as intelligence agents (at best), and foreign ones - just like spies. And this thesis is not a joke of humor. The traditions of the authorship of our developers in the changed conditions continue to be sacredly observed. In the world, in addition to a couple of dozen key AME exhibitions, dozens and hundreds of conferences, symposia, and other events on specialized topics, for example: armor, ballistics, individual combat equipment, small arms, communications and control equipment, are held. I dare to assure everyone that our presence is not expected at the overwhelming majority of them. At such events, the whole color of world developers gather on specialized topics, but ours are usually not there. It's time to understand that the traditional slogan for our enterprises "a model of weapons that has no analogues in the world" has long turned into a network "meme", causing general mistrust, and often - homeric "network laughter".
    Resolute people have finally appeared in our Ministry of Defense and the military-industrial complex who are ready to stir up the domestic swamp. They may not be fully aware of cause and effect, but at least they do. It should be understood that these people are not pests, but forced "sewers" raking the stagnant Augean stables. Their problem is that their actions are not properly explained and not commented on to the public. In Italy, there are agreements between the leadership of both sides on a whole package of measures, including Iveco, Centauro, Frechia, naval artillery and other components. Similarly, in France, where the Mistral contract entailed a series of related contacts for communications, ACCS, SIBE, etc. We are working with Germany, Finland, BAE Sys, GD, IMI and other entities. Such issues are not resolved in three days. It takes patience, perseverance and time. But there is no other way. Either we are equally (and with equal openness) integrating into the high-tech arms sector, or we will be killed by China and other "partners" in the markets of "economy class" weapons and military equipment and weapons "for the poor."

    http://twower.livejournal.com/799711.html

    I completely agree with Murakhovsky
    1. Olegovich
      Olegovich 14 May 2012 11: 40
      +3
      Quote: leon-iv
      Gave Victor Murakhovsky. Unfortunately, the group where the record is posted is closed, the link will not:

      The comment is gorgeous, it’s very bad that such explanations are not made to the wide discussion (press, TV), but only the facts and news themselves get there. Here from here and all the nasty things about the Moscow Region and the president.
    2. Kars
      Kars 14 May 2012 13: 20
      +5
      In the gurkhanovsky blog from yesterday.
      The USSR received the Yuarovsky Ruikates back in Angola, and dismantled them in the cogs. And he holds the 23 mm memory in the face.
      So there it’s just interesting for the super technologies in the Centaur. Not saying that you can just buy patents for the necessary --- this is a well-known world practice.
    3. Schwanzer
      Schwanzer 14 May 2012 14: 26
      +4
      The point of view of leon-iv is clear and understandable, I also think that there is a large share of truth in it, BUT TO MY SORRY, THE TRUTH CONCLUDES IN THAT CLOSED AREA AND SELECTION CRITERIA OF PURCHASED TECHNIQUE, then what we are talking about, guessing and breaking spears
    4. SSR
      SSR 14 May 2012 21: 25
      +2
      Thank you very much +500


      Ps.
      Forum oruns .. before shouting about prestige and why they’re not buying the most advanced from the west .. turn on uh mosk)))
      1. try to set out the requirements for technology on a piece of paper .. and then that's it
      to embody everything in the sample ... patency .. speed .. that would swim .. so that the gun would pierce everything and not break through itself .. so that the armor was strong and weighed little ... and then you will understand .. that you confuse the soft with warm ...
      and that I drank it at the design stage much more than when buying four and at least 20 pieces of equipment ... and that it is much more expensive and longer ... I take my leave for the sim ... for reading all kinds of wolves .. a waste of time. ah .. yes ... do not forget .. that not one of the NATO alliance .. can just like that sell your truly advanced equipment to us like that. they will devour their own for it. Russia sells the US S-400 and Iskander .... delirium))) delirium .. and you are mass raving.
  23. FREGATENKAPITAN
    FREGATENKAPITAN 14 May 2012 11: 04
    +10
    ...... The Americans bought a lot of Soviet equipment during and after the collapse of the Union through former brothers under the Warsaw Pact and in the former Soviet republics ..... (including the S-300, MiG 29, etc., etc. .P.)
    It is too early to argue, you must first find out the purpose of the acquisition .....
    But in general, equipment of this level should be purchased from adversaries only in a few cases: -
    - If we ourselves have no analogues
    - We cannot (even crack) to create weapons of this type, equal to or superior to the purchased ...
    -We can, in the case of procurements, provide our own MTO for embargoes, boycotts, war in the end ...-
    ..... Our T-34 was the best 2WW medium tank, not only because of its unsurpassed combat qualities, but also because production and repairs could be carried out in almost any mechanical workshop ... (I exaggerate a little, but the point is)
    1. Splin
      Splin 14 May 2012 12: 13
      +1
      Remark. Our former allies had neither the S-300, nor the Buka, nor the SU-27!
      1. zadorin1974
        zadorin1974 14 May 2012 23: 35
        0
        but something they had their own that they created without our help and bought it in the world with a bang ???
    2. zadorin1974
      zadorin1974 14 May 2012 23: 32
      0
      the high competitive ability of Soviet-Russian technology has always been really high in that the little-presenting mechanic pos can disassemble and assemble it in the fresh air under any weather conditions and with a minimum set of tools. She needed both fuel and the accompanying minimum quality. Any Bedouin or Asian (our collective farmer and worker doesn’t count; for servants of the people, finally, below the skirting board), he feels at home inside the boxes. Do they want to adopt comfort from their fellow travelers for the crew ??????
  24. dld35057
    dld35057 14 May 2012 11: 14
    +4
    damn I can’t understand why MO couldn’t ask our spies to steal documentation and technology from entih super duper centaurs.
    1. leon-iv
      leon-iv 14 May 2012 11: 23
      0
      Do you think it will be cheaper?
    2. core
      core 14 May 2012 12: 00
      0
      you are a naive person, it is ten times more expensive.
      1. Splin
        Splin 14 May 2012 12: 21
        +1
        The Chinas are not wasted on spies. Buy a sample copy and make unlicensed copies. And we are of the "civilized" type. So we lag behind.
        The GDR was spent on industrial espionage, but it made sense. All German electronics was bought up by the CMEA countries.
      2. dld35057
        dld35057 15 May 2012 10: 54
        0
        Well, what’s more expensive, but the spies are trained.
    3. Viking
      Viking 14 May 2012 13: 51
      +3
      And the practical experience of operation in various zones, including those with a very low temperature familiar to Russia, in the high mountains of the Caucasus, too, to steal? Anyway, what kind of small-angle inclinations is it - to steal, when can I go and buy? Italy, by the way, is not at all an adversary, but in many ways a partner of Russia.
  25. Dust
    Dust 14 May 2012 11: 18
    0
    With Iveco - ordinary wrecking, with Kentvar - similarly! About Mistral generally keep quiet ...
    Well, there is no such technology that is not visible from the outside!
    The real weakness of the Russian defense industry is electronics and software, but it was there that no one ever thought to sell the latest developments ...
    1. 11Goor11
      11Goor11 14 May 2012 12: 50
      0
      To our great happiness, the Western "advisers" of the 90s did not manage to ruin everything or insolently take out everything. In time they were given ...
      And retaliation? We will break through.
      More than once had to restore completely destroyed ...
      Just do not say that belief in victory is propaganda.
      Sometimes this is the only thing that gives strength to work, and to break the ridge of the Western reptile.
  26. vostok-47
    vostok-47 14 May 2012 11: 26
    +2
    Most likely the purpose of these purchases is the heart (engine) of the machine ..... I don’t know for sure ...... but they can be more economical or more reliable than ours ....
    1. Bronis
      Bronis 14 May 2012 12: 15
      +2
      Then it would be more logical to buy a license for the engine - it’s much cheaper, although our MO didn’t get acquainted with the logic textbook, or got acquainted, but not in the interests of the matter ...
      1. Viking
        Viking 14 May 2012 13: 57
        +1
        Even without sea trials? But he will drive into the Caucasus in the Caucasus and stall from a lack of oxygen and at -20 completely refuse to start. A little thought!
    2. Viking
      Viking 14 May 2012 13: 56
      +3
      And electronics, guidance system, layout?
  27. dred
    dred 14 May 2012 12: 02
    -2
    That's how the parishioners are sitting in our city of Moscow. I see ours more and more attracted to Italians. First, then the Beretta, and now the Centaurs, what's next August helicopters?
    1. Viking
      Viking 14 May 2012 14: 03
      +1
      Quote: dred

      That's how the parishioners are sitting in our city of Moscow. I see ours more and more drawn to the Italians. First, then the Beretta and the Centaurs now

      And it turns out what traitors are sitting in the US Department of Defense - they took and armed the US Army with M9 Berettas, as well as how many traitors are in the anti-terrorist units of the world, where the MP-5 NK is wildly popular in various variations. The Belarusian anti-terrorist group "Almaz" is fully armed with them.
      The fact that the best is taken, this is the process, and not ancient but its own.
      1. radikdan79
        radikdan79 14 May 2012 14: 19
        +1
        I absolutely agree with you. only neither the Yankees with "Berettas", nor the anti-terrorist units with the HK MP-5, nor many others adopted (and did not buy a license) weapons that have not been compared with other similar models. and in this article they declare that "... Russia is going to buy a license from Italian manufacturers in order to start the production of Centauro at the KamAZ plant in Naberezhnye Chelny ..." manufacturers!?! that's what's most disturbing. and for healthy competition I have both hands
        1. Viking
          Viking 14 May 2012 14: 34
          0
          Quote: radikdan79
          and in this article declare

          Not from a great mind say so.
          1. Ruswolf
            Ruswolf 14 May 2012 16: 17
            0
            ..... something was not heard about the purchase of similar samples of equipment from other manufacturers by the Moscow Region!?! this is what is most outraged. and for healthy competition with both hands


            I totally agree! If a comparison is made, then several units of different manufacturers are compared.
            And then what happens - There is a conversation that we are supposedly behind, the engines are Russian de-mo, electronics are generally gone. But for comparison and analysis, we get far from advanced development in the singular !. FOR WHAT?
            To convince yourself that we are not so bad? Or all the same, for something else! Or someone convinced someone that the Great Patriotic War passed on American tanks - they did not die.
            But it doesn’t turn out that they will buy cheaply used BU (as in Japan cars) and close the topic. They will say that they have already been equipped?!.
        2. core
          core 14 May 2012 19: 31
          0
          This article is complete nonsense and speculation of the author.
  28. Mr. Truth
    Mr. Truth 14 May 2012 12: 16
    +1
    dred,
    This is a single purchase. Read the statement by VIMa about such purchases, he knows exactly what he is saying ...
  29. AK-74-1
    AK-74-1 14 May 2012 12: 29
    +1
    Considering everything that happens with the procurement of imported military equipment, I have two explanations. Intelligence activities described in the post
    leon-iv and political arrangements with Sarkozy and Berlusconi.
  30. Bronis
    Bronis 14 May 2012 12: 32
    +3
    The fact that the car cannot be positioned as a wheeled tank is quite obvious. The armor protection, as far as one can understand from the overall dimensions, is bulletproof. As a tank destroyer, the car is clearly outdated - ATGMs are more efficient and smaller in size - you can either lighten the car or improve the reservation. I admit that we need such kind of vehicles, but only for airborne landing forces or as a means of supporting counter-terrorism operations — it is more economical and faster than driving a tank, and shooting a house with direct fire from a distance of 600-900 m is enough firepower. Moreover, the Internal Troops no longer have their tanks, as far as I know.
    Just what's innovative at Centauri? Why buy it? It is not difficult to develop such a machine on the basis of the unified platforms that everyone promises to us. And why should we then develop these unified platforms.
    The NATO SLAs and other digital interests are unlikely to be delivered to us - they have not survived from the mind.
    1. Viking
      Viking 14 May 2012 14: 05
      +2
      Quote: Bronis
      To develop such a machine is not very difficult

      Not sure. And in any case, it is better to develop with samples in front of your eyes, to understand what is needed, what is not needed.
  31. andrey903
    andrey903 14 May 2012 12: 50
    +2
    On our Nona it’s like it’s not a gun but a mortar, but it’s not exactly
    1. Splin
      Splin 14 May 2012 12: 55
      +2
      The universal gun shoots everything "that can be shoved into the barrel". The power of the projectile is comparable to a 152-mm howitzer.
      1. andrey903
        andrey903 14 May 2012 13: 30
        0
        I saw how Nona shoots, she’s not particularly impressive, but almost in bursts. Rather, a harassing fire, the tatk will definitely not hurt
        1. Splin
          Splin 14 May 2012 13: 39
          +2
          This is a low-impulse weapon. Indeed., "Spits" quietly like a mortar. Impressions should be received where the target is. It is precisely as a weapon of fire support, nothing else like the Octopus.
  32. ZUI
    ZUI 14 May 2012 13: 07
    +3
    Perhaps the plan, as with the "volga siber" machine, is to officially buy a platform, machine tools, equipment, machine sets, assemble a couple of thousand units, and then use this equipment and technology to produce something of your own.
    Threat Volga Cyber ​​- a great car.
    1. Viking
      Viking 14 May 2012 14: 07
      0
      Quote: ZUI
      Threat Volga Cyber ​​- a great car.

      Looked at the pictures, like nothing like that. But on the road, something did not meet her. Recently in production?
      1. ZUI
        ZUI 14 May 2012 19: 07
        +1
        7000 pieces were closed up - we selected all the car kits and finished the production. 87% of the machines are reprogrammed, like iron rot on saibers, like Cossacks.
    2. dld35057
      dld35057 15 May 2012 11: 25
      0
      Comrade ml. l-t. What can you say about our machine tool factories, what should they do? or you think that we have all fufel - so you're wrong. just by such reasoning, and even more by actions, this branch will finally be finished. and if you need an example, then here is our Vitebsk "VISTAN" a couple of years ago, by order of NASS, we made machines. And do not think that in Russia they cannot do anything and nothing. This is a stereotype in action "EVERYTHING IS BETTER IN THE WEST" but this is not fair competition - the machine-tool industry is killing our ivasha
  33. FIMUK
    FIMUK 14 May 2012 13: 53
    +1
    on the one hand, yes to buy new or almost new technology and bring it to mind gut, on the other hand, what about domestic developments that spent 1000 hours and millions of oil rubles ......
    Shl as an example in my opinion of the correct combination of "political necessity" and the development of their own military-industrial complex-
    the Germans froze to the last from the 5,56 cartridge, put off almost ready for a series of projects12, and finally in the 91st launched a gorgeous assault rifle of their own production g36, which shut the mouths of amers with m4 and watered correctly unified the alliance's ammunition for their country.
    And we, as usual, buy imported, ... or maybe we don’t know something and Russia is joining NATO? wink
  34. Maks111
    Maks111 14 May 2012 14: 07
    +1
    And I think so, in the general staff far from suckers work, and they know more than us, but some more. And if they buy, it’s not just like that. We’ll wait and see why this is all.

    But what I can’t understand, this is why our R&D doesn’t allocate good, normal funding for R&D. So far, our R&D has not finally died. It would be better in a better way than specialist engineers, but designers were trained.
    1. FIMUK
      FIMUK 14 May 2012 14: 13
      0
      and the university’s class is being prepared by class specialists — my comrade clever in radio engineering and physics finished Tasur perfectly, two diplomas under the heading secretly with a note to take into operation the work of several research institutes.
      total from the words of a friend if it weren’t for my family, I would have stayed in the research institute, but I need to feed my wife and daughter, therefore I work in Gazprom ..... and, of course, I’m no longer working out.
    2. baron.nn
      baron.nn 14 May 2012 14: 19
      -3
      Of course not suckers! Daredevils would not have thought of stealing on such a scale!
    3. PSih2097
      PSih2097 14 May 2012 17: 08
      -3
      And I think so, in the general staff far from suckers work, and they know more than us, but some more. And if they buy, it’s not just like that. We’ll wait and see why this is all.

      Wait there, top managers steer, not suckers ...
      And management is the art of managing, bringing maximum profit ... only who cares about this profit (only for real estate in the Moscow region that sold it was possible to get about 1 rubles, and where are they?), Obviously not for us (Russia) .
      1. PSih2097
        PSih2097 14 May 2012 23: 03
        0
        yes at least get angry ....
  35. Castor oil
    Castor oil 14 May 2012 14: 21
    +4
    Why so terrible happened? It’s normal healthy practice to not burn money and design from a white sheet and create experimental models of wheeled cannon armored vehicles, but to acquire half a dozen inexpensive ones and test them in our conditions to find out whether such equipment is necessary for the modern Russian army, as it fits into the new military concept, what are its technical and combat capabilities and does such a technique have the potential of modernization from the point of view of Russian engineering? If such samples turned out to be in demand, the path is very competent - to buy an inexpensive license, and having adjusted to our realities as part of a deep modernization, produce in small batches for the needs of the Russian army equipment that is obviously needed today. yes
  36. Yoshkin Kot
    Yoshkin Kot 14 May 2012 14: 57
    0
    people, well, after all, they don’t need a MBT to clean up Galicia! laughing
  37. Nechai
    Nechai 14 May 2012 15: 38
    +1
    Quote: Yarbay
    if you buy equipment from Italy

    Italian engineering and design previously often gave out masterpieces. It is the zest in some object. In general, the armament is historically, as it were, to put it mildly, not ....
    Quote: FREGATENKAPITAN
    .Americans bought a lot of Soviet equipment during and after the collapse of the Union through former brothers under the Warsaw Pact and in the former Soviet republics.

    ALL equipment of the Khimbats of the Warsaw Treaty Countries was taken out to the wilderness area, mothballed. Officially, this is now the property of the National Guard.
    1. PSih2097
      PSih2097 14 May 2012 17: 12
      0
      Italy was strong only in one thing, in military shipbuilding, but not less than in armored vehicles ...
  38. George IV
    George IV 14 May 2012 16: 01
    +1
    What do you understand !!!
    Remember Rezun!
    The cunning Stalin massively created wheeled road tanks to enslave everyone forever in Europe!
    Finally, we will create an army of wheeled tanks and will soon conquer all of Europe, and if they are also underwater, then both of America.
    1. PSih2097
      PSih2097 14 May 2012 17: 13
      0
      The cunning Stalin massively created wheeled road tanks to enslave everyone forever in Europe!

      Not Stalin, but Tukhachevsky and others like him ...
  39. Geton
    Geton 14 May 2012 16: 25
    -2
    Russian Defense Ministry - Pentagon branch.
  40. st. michman
    st. michman 14 May 2012 17: 07
    -2
    Just nonsense. But on the other hand, it’s easier to wash the headstock. And this is, for our bonzes, today, the main priority. And men let their blood pour. If as gaining experience, which is doubtful, then it is possible. Although we already can’t put a gun on wheels ourselves. They pissed everything.
  41. dred
    dred 14 May 2012 17: 12
    -2
    Quote: Viking
    And it turns out what traitors are sitting in the US Department of Defense - they took and armed the US Army with M9 Berettas, as well as how many traitors are in the anti-terrorist units of the world, where the MP-5 NK is wildly popular in various variations. The Belarusian anti-terrorist group Almaz is fully armed with them. The fact that the best is taken - this is the process, and not ancient but its own.

    Well, let's generally buy all weapons from NATO countries. The Americans armed themselves with Berettas not from a good life. There’s a sweeter pineapple somewhere. I want to say that we have more worthy samples. Than MO Sting didn’t like it or octopus based on BTR -90.
  42. felixis69
    felixis69 14 May 2012 17: 14
    0
    If you buy two samples .. okay! But if you are going to take a license and produce, then this is simply a betrayal !!!! On the battlefield, the Centaur will be immediately destroyed, and he will also be destroyed with the escort of the columns !!! This car is not for military operations, for window dressing !!! Oh, no matter how much Russia is fighting, mistakes are not going to good !!!
    And for those who like to talk that any equipment can be destroyed, I’ll look for my own link, where the Israelis analyzed the losses of their tanks and crews .... I’ll try to find it!
  43. USNik
    USNik 14 May 2012 17: 26
    0
    Nafig need this stuff? The fire control system is old, the layout is ordinary, the hodovka + the engine is nothing special, the armor is ancient like a mammoth's threshing floor, perhaps the 105mm gun is not bad, but not an advanced re-gun of any kind. The price is unknown, but for some reason many people say that Kurganets will be "more expensive" and they say this garbage is specially taken as a competitor to our armored personnel carriers, to reduce prices ... IMHO, in the end there is a brazen drank and a rollback from the side of Stouretkin and Co. (PS: and the srach on the Internet will be cooler than Mistralovsky, as if to order ...)
  44. PSih2097
    PSih2097 14 May 2012 17: 27
    -4
    Better used in the army bought airsoft drives, the same AK-74m



    and pyrotechnics airsoft,



    since these PSUs are not enough:

    The FX® system is comprised of FX® marking cartridges, weapon conversion kits and personal protective equipment. All three essential components are supported by a comprehensive Simunition® Scenario and Safety Certification Training Course.
    1. PSih2097
      PSih2097 14 May 2012 21: 22
      0
      Minus the least, argue ... Although I won’t tell you what you want ... they won’t let us lower the company, they won’t send them further ...
      Gentlemen minus, have you ever seen Airsoft in action, I think NO ...
      1. PSih2097
        PSih2097 14 May 2012 23: 04
        +2
        Argument ....
        1. PSih2097
          PSih2097 14 May 2012 23: 50
          +1
          Although initially think that it is better to get a ball of 0.2 cm or 7.62 (5,45) mm into the chest ...
          1. Gurza
            Gurza 14 May 2012 23: 55
            +1
            For training, special forces buy and play with the best airsoft teams (and specialists quickly endure them).
            I am for such an approach in the army, for practicing tactics this is the very thing, my friend is engaged in this business, a very, very interesting occupation, a lot can be gleaned from such tactical games, but it’s all not cheap! I put +
            1. PSih2097
              PSih2097 14 May 2012 23: 58
              0
              I’m not the Special Forces of the MoD, but about the troops of the same motorized rifle ... Let us recall the first assault on Grozny, who stormed him there?
            2. PSih2097
              PSih2097 15 May 2012 00: 20
              0
              For training, special forces buy and play with the best airsoft teams (and specialists quickly endure them).
              I am for such an approach in the army, for practicing tactics this is the very thing, my friend is engaged in this business, a very, very interesting occupation, a lot can be gleaned from such tactical games, but it’s all not cheap! I put +

              We also use airsoft drives themselves, because for bosses, the main thing is the premium, not preparation, and the drives were bought at our own expense, our last acquisition:


              Although I am for plastic markers at 5.45 (7.62) ... IMHO
    2. PSih2097
      PSih2097 14 May 2012 23: 52
      -2
      Shorter than fucking ... would., Believing that 100 shots at targets they are made by "Rembami" ...
      1. PSih2097
        PSih2097 15 May 2012 00: 27
        -2
        100 shots at targets

        for the entire period of stay in the army ...
        1. Klibanophoros
          Klibanophoros 15 May 2012 08: 09
          0
          Hardball only. Only Hardcore !!!! 111
  45. felixis69
    felixis69 14 May 2012 17: 28
    +2
    If you are not lazy, then carefully read the statistics below on the losses of Israeli armored vehicles, crews, military personnel involved in the use of armored vehicles in the Second Lebanon War:
    "A total of 30 tankers (19 regular army and 11 reservists) were killed in 13 tanks. In addition, a soldier from the reconnaissance company of the 12st armored brigade Itai Steinberger (i.e. an infantryman, not a tanker) was killed on August 401, so many sources indicate the number the dead soldiers of the armored forces as 31. It should also be noted that some sources considered the major of the engineering troops Hillel Nimrod, who died on 10.08.06/32/XNUMX, to be a tanker, respectively, they indicate the number of tankers killed as XNUMX.

    Summing up the data, for 30 dead tankers we get:

    • For reasons of death:
    • 25 tankers in 11 tanks died from ATGMs.
    • 5 tankers in 2 tanks died from landmines.

    • According to the total loss of tank crews:
    • 4 tanks in which the entire crew died (3 from ATGMs and 1 from a land mine);
    • 2 tanks, in which 3 tankers were killed;
    • 1 tank, in which 2 tankers died;
    • 6 tanks, in which 1 tanker perished.
    • Killed by tank type:
    • Merkava MK 2-10 in 3 tanks (4 + 2 + 4);
    • Merkava MK 3 - 9 in 4 tanks (3 + 1 + 4 + 1);
    • Merkava MK 4 - 11 in 6 tanks (1 + 1 + 1 + 3 + 1 + 4).
    • Note: considering cases of damaged tanks with dead crew members, you can see that the Merkava MK.4 showed the highest chance of crew survival in case of defeat. Their crew losses amounted to 1.8 people per tank, while the Merkav Mk.3 had 2.25, and the Merkav Mk.2 had 3.3.
    Irrecoverable losses - 5 tanks:
    1. Kars
      Kars 14 May 2012 17: 36
      +1
      Already used to link to the article completely --- very informative

      http://www.waronline.org/IDF/Articles/history/2nd-lebanon-war/acv-losses/
  46. Pessimist
    Pessimist 14 May 2012 17: 30
    0
    Our Defense Ministry is either completely stunned, or shame is brought on our defense industry! The Italians have not produced a single worthy tank in history, but ours "adopt" experience !!! Who??? "MISTRALS" smells like this deal! They're looking for a reason to write off money ...
    1. PSih2097
      PSih2097 14 May 2012 17: 37
      -1
      It’s obvious that they are looking for money to write off ...

      not to write off, but to put your loved ones on the account, somewhere in the Cayman Islands, with kickbacks to higher authorities in the same place ...
      1. PSih2097
        PSih2097 14 May 2012 21: 27
        0
        Oh, MO woke up ...
  47. felixis69
    felixis69 14 May 2012 17: 34
    +1
    And more about the Israeli "analysis":

    • 45 tanks were hit by ATGMs and RPG grenades, in total 51 missiles hit the tanks.
    • In 24 cases (47% of the number of hits), the cumulative stream penetrated the armor of the tanks, apparently in 3 cases out of these 24 in the tanks the ammunition detonated.
    • In total, about 60 BTT units received combat damage, including 48-52 tanks. 5 tanks were irretrievably lost - 3 from ATGM hits (one Merkava Mk.2, Mk.3 and Mk.4 each) and 2 from HE explosions (one Merkava Mk.2 and Mk.4 each).
    • 31 fighter of armored forces, including 30 tankmen. In addition, 4 more soldiers died from ATGM hits in the BTT - 3 in D9 bulldozers and 1 in the heavy Puma armored personnel carrier.
    • Tanks "Merkava", especially the newest Mk.4, showed excellent resistance to combat defeat. On average, 1 tanker died in each tank whose armor was pierced, and the ammunition load, apparently, detonated in only 3 tanks out of 24 that were pierced. "
    !!!!!!!!!!!! The question is, what would happen if there was a "Centaur" on the battlefield, but the Israelis simply would not kill their soldiers in this nedotank !!!!
  48. Sleptsoff
    Sleptsoff 14 May 2012 17: 37
    0
    Another spit in the face of our defense industry, perhaps well-deserved.
    1. PSih2097
      PSih2097 14 May 2012 21: 29
      -1
      Another spit in the face of our defense industry, perhaps well-deserved.

      or maybe not ...
  49. SVJTOGOR
    SVJTOGOR 14 May 2012 17: 51
    0
    I re-read not so long ago the Years and Wars of General Gorbatov so he wrote that the tsarist army fought much more effectively than the Soviet in the first years of the war. Although in the tsarist army uniforms and weapons were predominantly Western models. If someone knows how to do better, let him do it, and we will take a look at it and adopt it.
  50. yacht
    yacht 14 May 2012 18: 09
    0
    If we discard the corruption component, since in this case everything is clear and there is nothing to comment on, we bought an Italian because there are no own developments on wheeled tanks, and than to start from scratch, it is still better to start from the existing base. The newest developments will simply not be sold to us, everything is clear, they bought what they could buy. An interesting question is where and how the military are going to use the "man-horse".