Military Review

BMD-4M as the basis for a family of vehicles

35
In recent years, the airborne troops of Russia have been actively developing new armored vehicles of several types. In addition, in the near future they will receive a number of new types of military equipment for various purposes. A curious feature of the already existing and expected machines should be their maximum unification, which significantly facilitates joint operation. According to the principle decision of the command, a significant part of the new types of equipment should be based on the landing gear of the BMD-4M airborne combat vehicle.


The BMD-4M was created several years ago and entered service with the Airborne Forces in the 2016 year. To date, the troops have received nearly two hundred of these machines in the base configuration, and deliveries continue. This technique is intended for transportation and fire support of fighters on the battlefield. Like other airborne vehicles, combat vehicles of the new model can be parachuted in a landing and parachute way. High firepower is provided by the combat module, equipped with 100-mm gun-launcher, 30-mm automatic cannon and 7,62-mm machine gun. Together with a crew of three, the BMD-4M carries five paratroopers.


Airborne combat vehicles BMD-4M on exercises. Photo of the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation / mil.ru


The BMD-4М chassis, considered as the basis for various armored vehicles, gets a relatively light armored body capable of protecting against rifle bullets. weapons. In the original version, the hull has a classic layout with a front and central location of inhabited compartments and aft engine-transmission compartment. The chassis is equipped with a UTD-29 diesel engine with 500 horsepower. The pyatikatkovaya chassis has a controlled hydropneumatic suspension. To overcome the water obstacles are provided jet propulsion.

Unified armored personnel carrier

In the recent past, the BTR-MD armored personnel carrier was developed specifically for the Airborne Forces. At the heart of its design lay the landing gear chassis BMD-4, built in limited quantities. Later it was decided to re-equip the troops with the BMD-4M vehicles, as a result of which an improved version of the armored personnel carrier called the BTR-MDM "Shell" appeared. Unlike a number of other modern armored vehicles, this model is not based on the BMD-4M design. In this case, there is a unification of two machines on a number of units.

Most of the hull elements and internal equipment for the BTR-MDM is borrowed from the base BTR-MD. As a result, the two cars almost do not differ in appearance, and also have similar tactical and technical characteristics. At the same time, the upgraded "Shell" received a power plant from BMD-4М, including the engine UTD-29. Some improvements in the project have undergone hull and chassis. Other elements, such as means of transporting troops, weapons or communication systems, have not undergone major changes.


Armored personnel carrier BTR-MDM / Photo by the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation / mil.ru


In connection with the decision to abandon the first version of the BMD-4 armored assault vehicle, the further fate of the BTR-MD armored personnel carrier at its base was in doubt. Several years ago this issue was resolved, and a newer BTR-MDM went into the series. It was assumed that the unification with the BMD-4M, which is also being put into series, could facilitate the joint operation of equipment. To date, the troops have received several dozen BTR-MDM, and their production continues.

BTR-based Scout

In domestic practice, armored personnel carriers are often considered as the basis for equipment of a particular purpose, including for auxiliary vehicles. In the autumn of last year, a new special vehicle, built on the chassis of an armored personnel carrier BTR-MDM, was adopted by the Airborne Forces. A reconnaissance chemical machine РХМ-5М was created for the units of radiation, chemical and biological protection. According to last year's reports, in 2018, it was planned to begin serial construction and supply of new equipment to the troops.

Externally, the new PXM-5M is almost the same as the basic Shell. There is also a maximum similarity of the internal units. The difference between the two machines is in the equipment of the habitable compartment. Unlike an armored personnel carrier, a reconnaissance vehicle bears a set of equipments necessary for working in the infected zones. It is able to automatically study the situation, track weather conditions, find threats and make maps of contaminated areas. Data on threats in an automatic mode are given to various consumers.


Intelligence chemical machine РХМ-5М. Photo of the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation


Almost all of the targeted PXM-5M equipment is located inside a protected enclosure. Beyond it are only separate devices. The machine and its systems are operated by a crew of four placed in the common compartment. For self-defense there is an installation with a machine gun. Also saved smoke grenade launchers used on the base BTR.

"Octopus" on the new chassis

At the disposal of the airborne troops are self-propelled anti-tank guns 2S25 "Octopus-SD." This piece of equipment was built on an experienced light chassis. tank "Object 934" and received a combat module with a 125-mm smoothbore gun-launcher 2A75. Light self-propelled guns can land using parachute systems and support troops with fire. "Octopus-SD" is capable of fighting both manpower or unprotected equipment, and enemy tanks.

A few years ago, it was decided to thoroughly upgrade the existing self-propelled 2C25 self-propelled guns. As part of the 2C25М project, the Sprut-SDM1 proposed to upgrade the fire control system, increasing the basic combat qualities of the vehicle, and also to replace the existing chassis. In order to maximize unification with other airborne equipment, the upgraded combat compartment should be transferred to the modified BMD-4М chassis. The advantages of this upgrade are obvious.


Prototype SPTP 2C25 "Sprut-SDM1". Photo Concert "Tractor Plants" / tplants.com


In connection with the growth of loads, the existing chassis had to be lengthened. The hull received a new section, and in the chassis included a couple of additional support rollers and two supporting rollers on each side. The power plant and transmission are directly borrowed from BMD-4M. As for the fighting compartment, it gets an improved fire control system, which allows you to improve the accuracy of fire. Previously reported the possibility of introducing a new complex of guided weapons with anti-tank missiles launched through the barrel of the gun.

To date, no more than several experimental machines Sprut-SDM1 have been built. This year, it is planned to begin state tests, according to the results of which such equipment will be able to enter service. In the case of successful completion of the test, the Airborne Forces will receive new serial machines no later than the beginning of the twenties.

Artillery "Lotus"

The BMD-4М chassis extended to two skating rinks has already found application in another project of self-propelled artillery. Since 2016, the domestic industry has been working on the 2C42 self-propelled gun project with the cipher "Lotus". The goal of the project is to create a new combat vehicle with a full-swing turret with a 120 caliber gun. According to known data, in the future, the new “Lotus” will have to replace the outdated 2C9 “Nona-S” machines.

According to reports from the recent past, the chassis for the CAO 2C42 should not differ significantly from the corresponding design for the 2C25М. It was proposed to use the same armored body with anti-bullet protection, having an increased length. The chassis must also have seven road wheels on board. The power plant and transmission should not be changed. Combat weight will be 18 t, which will allow the use of self-propelled guns with modern parachute systems.


Model of the 2C42 "Lotus" combat vehicle. Photo by Vitalykuzmin.net


According to official data, Lotos will receive an 120-mm long-barreled gun with wide combat capabilities. By changing the elevation angles from -4 ° to + 80 °, the machine will be able to attack targets at ranges up to 13 km. In this case, it is likely that the gun will be able to solve the tasks of a field gun, howitzers and mortars, depending on the assigned combat mission and the ammunition used.

The industry has already shown models of the promising IJSC Lotos, but the full-fledged prototype has not yet participated in open events. According to last year's reports, by the beginning of 2018, the first prototype was supposed to be built, and in 2020, serial production would be launched. Thus, it is expected that in the near future the first public demonstration of the new 2-XNNXX “Lotos” will take place.

Landing "Cornet"

In 2015, the first reports appeared about the desire of the military department to develop a new self-propelled anti-tank missile system intended for the airborne troops. At the same time, it became known that this sample of equipment would be made on the chassis of the BMD-4M armored vehicle, and its weapon would be a launcher with Kornet missiles. The finished sample equipment received an index GRAU 9P162M. Unfortunately, for a long time there have been no new reports about this project.

A few months ago, it was officially announced that in the interests of the Airborne Forces the development work with the Cornet-D1 cipher, providing for the installation of an anti-tank complex on a tracked chassis, was indeed being implemented. Moreover, the project is already nearing completion. Over the next two years, it is planned to conduct state tests, after which self-propelled anti-tank systems will go into series and enter the troops.

BMD-4M as the basis for a family of vehicles
The only known image of the complex 9P162M "Cornet-D1". Photo Gurkhan.blogspot.com


Experienced technology of the new type, if it exists, has not yet been openly demonstrated. Only one image is known showing the 9P162М / "Cornet-D1" product. This figure shows the BMD-4M chassis with enhanced side projection protection, but without a standard combat compartment with a turret. Instead, in the center of the case there are two retractable launchers of the Kornet complex. Each of them carries four transport and launch containers with missiles and opto-electronic fire control devices.

There is reason to believe that the prototypes of a new combat vehicle for the Airborne Forces are at least being built and are being prepared for future tests. In the near future for the first time they can show the public and professionals.

Anti-aircraft "Fowler"

Now the Airborne Forces are equipped with several short-range anti-aircraft missile systems, and these are relatively old systems. To replace them, a new model of technology is being created that meets modern requirements. The air defense system for the Airborne Forces is created in the framework of the project with the code "Birdies". As in a number of other cases, the BMD-4M tracked chassis was chosen as the basis for this sample.


ZRK "Pine" - a possible source of components for the complex "Fowler". Photo KB Tochmash them. A.E. Nudelman / kbtochmash.ru


Until recently, the process of shaping the shape of the future air defense system and the search for optimal solutions continued. In early August, the command of the airborne troops officially announced the completion of this part of the work. The appearance is formed, and now the industry is engaged in its embodiment in the form of design documentation, which will be used to build an experienced equipment. At the same time, as before, far from all the expected details were announced.

It has repeatedly been pointed out that for unification of the new anti-aircraft complex with other airborne equipment it is proposed to use the tracked landing gear of the BMD-4M airborne combat vehicle. What systems will be installed on it is unknown. In the recent past, suggestions have been made about the possible upgrading of the launch vehicle and missiles of the Strela-10М3 complex. It was also possible to use the system "Pine". Whether these assumptions are true, and whether they have become the basis for the technical appearance is not known.

A prototype of the Ptitselov air defense missile system is planned to be built in 2020 year. After all the necessary tests, an order for serial equipment will appear. Its deliveries are scheduled for 2022 year. After that, the "Birdies" will begin to replace self-propelled air defense systems of the family "Strela-10", which are currently the basis of air defense of the Airborne Forces.

Large family

Over the past decades, the Soviet and Russian army actively used the idea of ​​using existing chassis as the basis for various types of equipment. In recent years, this idea has changed noticeably, which has led to the emergence of the concept of unified platforms, originally created as the basis for machines of different classes and types.


BMD-4M at the site. Photo of the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation / mil.ru


The same trends can be observed in the development of combat and auxiliary vehicles for the airborne troops. A number of modern and promising models for the Airborne Forces are built on the basis of the BMD-4M chassis or with the extensive use of its units. This unification leads to obtaining obvious advantages of a production, operational and combat nature. Naturally, the military and industry are striving to realize the full potential of the idea of ​​a unified chassis.

Several samples of armored vehicles, built on the basis of BMD-4М or using its units, have already been put into service, are produced in a large series and mastered by the troops. Over the next few years, new combat vehicles of other classes and other purposes will join the combat units in them. According to known data, at present, the Airborne Troops Command plans to create up to a dozen different types of equipment based on a single chassis, reconfigured in one way or another. Due to this, it will be possible to close most of the needs of the troops in the new technology.

Initially, the BMD-4M airborne combat vehicle could only be considered as a protected vehicle for fighters capable of supporting them with fire. Now the situation has changed. This model of armored vehicles becomes the base for a number of new combat vehicles for various purposes. After the implementation of all current plans involving the development of nearly a dozen samples on a unified chassis, the BMD-4M can deservedly be considered the basis of the Airborne Forces fleet.

On the materials of the sites:
http://mil.ru/
http://skbm.ru/
http://tplants.com/
http://tass.ru/
http://rg.ru/
http://ria.ru/
http://russianarms.ru/
http://bastion-karpenko.ru/
http://rbase.new-factoria.ru/
http://gurkhan.blogspot.com/
https://bmpd.livejournal.com/
Author:
35 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. The comment was deleted.
  2. Zaurbek
    Zaurbek 11 August 2018 08: 13
    +2
    2C42 with the code "Lotus". The aim of the project is to create a new combat vehicle having a full-rotary turret with a 120 mm gun.


    It seems to me that the emphasis should be on such a machine, it has a good OF mine and if you add ATGM it will fight with tanks. And why they don’t do BMDs with Cornet’s ATGMs, I don’t understand at all ... they can even be done on the basis of the old BMP (BMD) -1/2 when they are withdrawn from service.
    1. self-propelled
      self-propelled 11 August 2018 10: 26
      +2
      I think the emphasis should be on such a machine, it has a good OF mine

      whoever does not have this good PF mine - ACS "Vena" + ACS "Nona" (and "Nona-B" ie towed) + ACS "Hosta" ...
      And why do not do BMD with ATGM Cornet
      - don't do it at all?
  3. max702
    max702 11 August 2018 09: 59
    +2
    One question, is it possible to make the whole family on the same chassis? It’s good to leave everyone an elongated chassis, then there will be more space in the BMD \ BTR (but it’s never superfluous) and the area of ​​the caterpillar will increase as much as possible and buoyancy .. Why bother with two projects, or again the landing component, and according to the plans for the plane the desired number will not fit?
    1. self-propelled
      self-propelled 11 August 2018 10: 45
      +3
      Quote: max702
      One question, is it possible to make the whole family on the same chassis? Leaving everyone an elongated chassis is good, then there will be more space in the BMD \ BTR (and it’s never superfluous) and the track area will increase as much as possible and buoyancy ..

      you can and should (as my opinion)! only not on one "elongated" chassis - for one pair of vehicles a "long" seven-roller base is a necessity (like the Sprut tank destroyer and a powerful self-propelled gun (like the Pat-S)); for the landing version of the air defense system, support vehicles, etc. a six-wheel base will be enough; for BMD and BTR-D, five rollers are enough ...
      and indeed, the idea of ​​maximum chassis unification has long been in the atmosphere of the military. two tracked chassis - heavy for tanks. SAU, BMP-T, BMPP and the like + chassis for lightweight tracked floating conveyors, BMD, BTR-D, PT SAU ...
      + two wheeled chassis - heavy for all kinds of carriers of tactical, strategic, anti-ship weapons and air defense systems;
      and a light chassis, as the basis for all kinds of armored personnel carriers, reconnaissance, command and control vehicles, etc.
      DREAMING CAN BE ENDLESS (as long as alive) ...
      1. max702
        max702 11 August 2018 10: 50
        +2
        Quote: self-propelled
        you can and should (as my opinion)! only not on one "lengthened" chassis - for one pair of vehicles a "long" seven-roller base is a necessity (like the tank destroyer "Sprut" and a powerful ACS (like "Pat-S"); for the landing version of the air defense system, support vehicles, etc. . there will be enough six-wheel base; for BMD and BTR-D, five rollers will be enough ...

        Uh, what's the point then? What is there different number of rollers what's here? I offer one seven-shot for all occasions, BMD \ BTR users for the extra volume will always say thank you .. But will they get into the plane as expected?
        1. self-propelled
          self-propelled 11 August 2018 10: 58
          +2
          Quote: max702
          for the extra volume always say thank you ..

          paratroopers - YES, but BTA pilots will damn you for that.
          maximum volume is not always needed. I have described few options for the hypothetical (possible) use of a unified chassis.
          using the same units and assemblies in MTO, suspension ... you can create a huge number of ONE TYPE machines FROM and TO "playing" with full weight, volume, long chassis (and, accordingly, the number of road wheels on board) ...
          and for such a universal platform (chassis), military technicians will kiss the legs of the designer of such a platform
        2. Bad_gr
          Bad_gr 11 August 2018 12: 04
          0
          Quote: max702
          I offer one seven-shot for all occasions,

          In any case, the hulls for BMD, self-propelled guns and conveyors are different, so it makes sense to lengthen the hull by one skating rink, where the shorter hull (which has its advantages) is completely dispensed with.
    2. cordon332
      cordon332 11 August 2018 13: 20
      0
      Quote: max702
      One question, is it possible to make the whole family on the same chassis? It’s good to leave everyone an elongated chassis, then there will be more space in the BMD \ BTR (but it’s never superfluous) and the area of ​​the caterpillar will increase as much as possible and buoyancy .. Why bother with two projects, or again the landing component, and according to the plans for the plane the desired number will not fit?

      Of course, the airborne and airborne transport component also plays a role. The Semikatkovy Octopus is loaded one instead of two BMD-4Ms, while 4 trunks on the BMD are lost and one barrel appears on the tank. A net loss of 3 trunks is extremely unprofitable, and the airborne forces can count trunks, reset the equipment to the rear, where each trunk counts
      1. max702
        max702 13 August 2018 22: 07
        0
        Quote: kordon332
        Of course, the airborne and airborne transport component also plays a role. The Semikatkovy Octopus is loaded one instead of two BMD-4Ms, while 4 trunks on the BMD are lost and one barrel appears on the tank. A net loss of 3 trunks is extremely unprofitable, and the airborne forces can count trunks, reset the equipment to the rear, where each trunk counts

        I fully support you regarding the Octopus a useless and harmful pepelats for our army, but a seven-wheeled chassis would be a good help. let's right away recognize parachute landing with technology never will be, but on the ground the landing will be constantly fighting and therefore the excess volume (which is always small) will be received with a bang, take an interest in how the army loves and appreciates PTSki, so it’s better to sacrifice hypothetical air transportability / airborne and finally think about people, not about the plans of the generals ..
        pc: Repeatedly wrote his own technique for airborne foolishness utter nonsense, they don’t need it, turntables would be in the subject, MI-38, despite the price, is very promising .. But ideally, the ba-ka-29 could be converted into a veranda for a strike attack helicopter yes yes that the very concept of a flying BMP that MI-24 didn’t pull out. A KA-29 with engines from MI-38 will have such a chance ..
  4. cordon332
    cordon332 11 August 2018 10: 48
    +3
    An excellent and quite informative article. Thanks to the author. And I am glad that the Airborne Forces will finally get into service a family of vehicles developed on the same base, which of course will significantly increase the effectiveness of the Airborne Forces in various combat situations. I would like to add that the family under development in terms of chassis units as a whole, and in terms of armament, and main components, is unified with the family developed on the basis of the BMP-3, which is in service with the SV, and this is a single supply of spare parts and repairs, and, very importantly, there is no need for personnel to retrain when changing the type of hostilities and the corresponding replacement of military vehicles.
    Adoption of airborne self-propelled guns according to the type of Vienna in the NE, due to a powerful 120mm mine with a sufficient range, high elevation angle, and modern KUO, will significantly increase the firepower of the airborne forces and will forever bury the dream of using a light octopus tank in the airborne forces. the new machine will surpass it in all respects in all combat situations at the same price.
    1. Bad_gr
      Bad_gr 11 August 2018 12: 07
      +1
      Quote: kordon332
      ... And I am glad that the Airborne Forces will finally receive a family of machines developed on the same base, ...

      At the base, which in turn is maximally unified with the BMP-3.
      1. Bad_gr
        Bad_gr 11 August 2018 12: 21
        +2
        Quote: Bad_gr
        maximally unified with BMP-3

    2. DarkMatter
      DarkMatter 11 August 2018 13: 14
      +1
      An excellent and quite informative article.

      I myself am surprised. And this is exactly Kirill Ryabov, maybe the reptilians replaced him? wassat
      I’ll put a plus even, for the labors, so to speak.
  5. Ostup bender
    Ostup bender 11 August 2018 11: 03
    -1
    The outdated, or rather fundamentally fundamentally incorrect and dangerous layout of the behi three and bmd four, these projects will not lead to anything normal. When all over the world the ammunition from the airborne compartment is carried into an uninhabited module on the roof, Russian engineers push in there also a 100 mm standing ammunition. unless the chassis is suitable for something.
    1. Bad_gr
      Bad_gr 11 August 2018 12: 11
      +3
      Quote: OSTup bender
      The outdated, or rather fundamentally fundamentally incorrect and dangerous layout of the behi three and bmd four, these projects will not lead to anything normal. When all over the world the ammunition from the airborne compartment is carried into an uninhabited module on the roof, Russian engineers push in there also a 100 mm standing ammunition. unless the chassis is suitable for something.

      That is, an explosion of an ammunition shell with 100mm shells on the roof (where it is easier to get into them) for an assault force sitting behind bulletproof armor will pass unnoticed?
    2. Corn
      Corn 11 August 2018 12: 46
      +1
      The layout of the bmd4m itself is outdated despite the fact that this is a new technique, it is not clear why it was impossible to do it right at once, following the example of the same modernization of the bmp3 "dragoons"

      , and Russia has uninhabited combat modules, the same "boomerang-bm" looked pretty good to itself, or even a "derivation" for 57mm amateurs.
      1. Bad_gr
        Bad_gr 11 August 2018 13: 28
        +10
        Quote: Corn
        The layout of the bmd4m itself is outdated despite the fact that this is a new technique, it is not clear why it was impossible to do it right at once, following the example of the same modernization of the bmp3 "dragoons"

        Outdated, you say .... With this so-called "new layout" we have assembled BMP-1-2. Ask those who rode these cars for a long time, how the landing party feels on these swings, how the car behaves when overcoming water obstacles, etc. BMP-3 (like BMD-4) was developed by order of the military, taking into account all these stocks. For example, in the BMP-3, the engine was moved to the stern in order to balance the heavy frontal armor plate, which, unlike the hull, is steel, but holds a 30 mm cannon shell. The landing party, along with the weapons, moved to the center of the vehicle, to the most comfortable place for both people and weapons. And all these new trends (the engine is in front, the armored personnel carrier has only a rear exit instead of side ones, etc.) in the creation of new armored vehicles, this one is already from the managers, with an eye to the west.
        1. Corn
          Corn 11 August 2018 13: 59
          +3
          I myself drove more than many on BMP2, due to a softer driving feel much nicer than from a march on BMD1 / 2.
          And what is wrong with overcoming water obstacles if you raise the shield?
          About how the military ordered to watch the American feature film "Pentagon War", otherwise the creation of a cardboard, floating, flying, with a 100mm BMD cannon, which ... at the same time cannot adequately perform the functions of delivering and unloading troops, it is impossible to explain.
          In the same "kurganets", which has no analogues in the world (the car is really breakthrough, it's a pity it won't go into production), a completely adequate layout returns, and with it the BMP functions.
          1. Blackgrifon
            Blackgrifon 11 August 2018 17: 32
            +2
            Quote: Corn
            "Kurganets" (the car is really breakthrough, it's a pity it won't go into production) a completely adequate layout is returning, and with it the BMP functions.

            By the way, it’s not a fact that it won’t work. I spent two days, damn it, in search of this interview, and as a result I found the source. And what I see there: refusal not from mass production in general, but from large-scale production. Yes, and it was about the T-14 and Boomerang.
          2. Bad thing
            Bad thing 13 August 2018 12: 07
            +1
            Quote: Corn
            I myself drove more than many on BMP2, due to a softer driving feel much nicer than from a march on BMD1 / 2.
            And what were your feelings after 2-3 hours of movement at the door of the troop compartment in the BMP-1/2, along a dirt road with bumps and potholes? Usually infantry from there fell out like bags of manure and ammonia was sniffed. About BMD I will not say because I didn’t exploit, and in the BMP tower or behind the mechanical drive it is much more comfortable than in the landing.
        2. The comment was deleted.
        3. The comment was deleted.
      2. goose
        goose 6 November 2018 11: 11
        0
        Quote: Corn
        looked good or even "derivation" for 57mm lovers.

        For tactical infantry purposes, a 100-mm low-ballistic gun is cooler than a 57-mm gun, even taking into account the appearance of remote detonation, which is still only in the long term.
        Typical task: forceful seizure of a settlement. Here's HOW? weapons of "derivation" will help against well-dug infantry.
        With a 100-mm cannon, you can climb into a closed position and from the distance of 2-4 km to level everything that will be. Almost no chance to get a response. Its pocket artillery.
    3. Blackgrifon
      Blackgrifon 11 August 2018 13: 59
      0
      Quote: OSTup bender
      carried out in an uninhabited module on the roof, Russian engineers shove 100mm

      Piranha, Striker-Dragoon, Commando-like, Patria, BMP Ulan / Bradley, Chinese BBM - also with uninhabited modules? :)

      Quote: Corn
      it is not clear why it was impossible to do it right at once, following the example of the same modernization of the bmp3 "dragoons"

      The problem is weight. The classic scheme assumes the concentration of weight in the nose of the vehicle, which is not comme il faut for the Airborne Forces, who want all their equipment to be exclusively airborne. True, the "Wishlist" of paratroopers is no longer very strongly perceived and airborne assault formations (which make up the bulk of the Airborne Forces) go rather not airborne, but airborne equipment: both BMP-2 and BTR-82A. And for the BMD-4M, work is underway to develop a quick-detachable hinged protective kit.
      1. Bad_gr
        Bad_gr 11 August 2018 19: 05
        0
        Quote: Blackgrifon
        And for BMD-4M, work is underway to develop a quick-detachable mounted protective kit.

        So, it seems, these works are long over. If the car is with a parachute, then the equipment is the same. If it is intended to be used without a parachute, then additional weight protection is hung in this very parachute (if memory does not change 2.5 tons)
        With additional protection, it looks like this:
        1. Blackgrifon
          Blackgrifon 12 August 2018 08: 59
          0
          Quote: Bad_gr
          So, it seems, these works are long over.

          He was surprised when he read it. But about a year t.z. on the Bulletin of Mordovia they wrote about the availability of an order from the Airborne Forces to the Steel Research Institute. Perhaps the landing party wants precisely a quick-detachable set: if it is necessary to land, it is removed and dropped, and it is set and drove into the field.
  6. Ostup bender
    Ostup bender 11 August 2018 11: 05
    0
    And this is with bulletproof armor.
    1. Vadim237
      Vadim237 11 August 2018 11: 49
      -1
      Yes, they will not be able to withstand hits from 40 mm NATO guns, but NATO vehicles will not be able to withstand being hit by an Arkan missile with 750 mm armor penetration behind ERA.
  7. Hadji Murat
    Hadji Murat 11 August 2018 15: 04
    0
    total in the Airborne Forces, there are 182 BMD-4M
  8. Old26
    Old26 11 August 2018 15: 21
    0
    Quote: kordon332
    Adoption of airborne self-propelled guns according to the type of Vienna in the NE, due to a powerful 120mm mine with a sufficient range, high elevation angle, and modern KUO, will significantly increase the firepower of the airborne forces and will forever bury the dream of using a light octopus tank in the airborne forces. the new machine will surpass it in all respects in all combat situations at the same price.

    Do you seriously think that this will bury the dream of using a light tank? And that the new car will surpass the "Sprut" in all respects? NEVERI repeat NEVER the mortar gun cannot replace the gun all over article... And self-propelled guns such as "Nona" and "Lotus" NEVER will not replace the same "Octopus". Each has its own niche. The anti-tank capabilities of the same "Nona" or "Lotus" are generally zero compared to the anti-tank capabilities of a tank gun.
    If this is such a universal tool, then why the hell are they deploying full-fledged tank battalions equipped with tanks with the same weapon as the "Sprut" in the Airborne Forces divisions?
    1. max702
      max702 12 August 2018 13: 26
      0
      Quote: Old26
      then why the hell are they deploying full-fledged tank battalions equipped with tanks with the same weapon as the Sprut in the airborne divisions?

      Armor ... Unlike the "Octopus" rattles .. Classic tanks have a chance not to burn out right away ..
    2. cordon332
      cordon332 13 August 2018 14: 38
      0
      Quote: Old26
      Do you seriously think that this will bury the dream of using a light tank? And that the new car will surpass the Sprut in all respects? NEVER, I repeat, NEVER cannon-mortar be able to replace a cannon in all articles

      If you read the comment carefully, you can understand that the armament of the airborne forces is being discussed. Even if in a modern combined arms battle tanks make up 10% of all types of targets, which tanks you are going to hit in the rear, they simply aren’t there, that is, the OBPS will be dead weight. For all other combat qualities - the power of the land mines, according to the possibility of firing from closed positions and in mountain conditions, in terms of firing range, the Lotus is completely superior to the Octopus. So with the arrival of Lotus in the Airborne Forces, the Octopus song will be sung. Yes, and in general - there have never been light tanks in the Airborne Forces, and Octopus is an atavism from the desire of the Airborne Command to have all weapons, as in the NE.
      As for the full-fledged tank battalions in the Airborne Forces, these are the forces of development success that the Airborne Forces subdivisions have achieved and the fact that these battalions complete the MBT once again confirms that there is no place for the Octopus in the armament line of the Airborne Forces.
  9. bogart047
    bogart047 11 August 2018 15: 23
    0
    after so many years we thought about the obvious. I don’t understand, are there people from another planet or are there any nuances incomprehensible to mere mortals?
    1. Bad thing
      Bad thing 13 August 2018 11: 50
      0
      Quote: bogart047
      I don’t understand, are there people from another planet or are there any nuances incomprehensible to mere mortals?
      There are no ordinary people, just there is a desire of the Moscow region to have the perfect equipment (preferably for little money), there are opportunities (or impossibilities) of the design bureau and industry, there is a bureaucracy (which is more from it, good or harm, an eternal question), there are interests of large business (here lobbying rules), and there are opportunities for the state to finance all these programs, taking into account priority, this is far from a complete set of factors affecting the final decision.
  10. san4es
    san4es 11 August 2018 16: 27
    0
    hi ... Weight, t 13,5
    Length, mm 6100
    Width, mm 3110
    Height, mm 2450
    Clearance, mm 190 - 590
    Speed, km / h
    on highway 70
    afloat 10
    Power reserve
    by highway, km 500
    Engine UTD-29
    Engine power, l. with. Xnumx
    Specific power, l. With. per ton 37
    Overcoming obstacles
    elevation angle 35
    bank angle 25
    pit width, m 2
    wall height, m ​​0,7
    Armament 100 mm 2A70 cannon, 30 mm 2A72 automatic cannon and PKT machine gun
    Ammunition, pcs. 34 and 4 Arkan missiles, 500
    Crew 3
    Landing, people 6 .... soldier
  11. demiurg
    demiurg 11 August 2018 18: 28
    +5
    That is why the Airborne Forces will receive aluminum with a gun, and the Kurgan will not see the riflemen?
    Moreover, in the case of real use of airborne forces, they will still be dissected using the technology of motorized rifles, i.e. well if on the BMP-3, but most likely on the second BMP.
    Around the world, airborne forces are given cars weighing a maximum of 4-5 tons, which can be deployed anywhere with a medium helicopter.
    Or I don’t know what, or when there was at least one massive use of airborne landing of Soviet / Russian technology?
    1. Vadim237
      Vadim237 12 August 2018 10: 54
      +1
      There is a time for everything - the Kurgan has not yet been completed.