New light amphibious tank is created on the basis of self-propelled gun "Octopus"

38
Development of a new light floating tank on the basis of the airborne self-propelled anti-tank gun "Octopus-SDM1" is already underway. This was reported by TASS, citing a statement by Sergey Abdulov, chief designer of the Special Design Bureau of Mechanical Engineering (SKBM, part of the holding "High-precision complexes").

New light amphibious tank is created on the basis of self-propelled gun "Octopus"




As the chief designer of SKBM said, based on the Sprut-SDM1, a new light tank is being developed. In contrast to the "Sprut" new tank will not be airborne, but will remain floating. The lack of airborne assault removes mass restrictions from the new light tank, due to which the Sprut has only bulletproof armor and, thus, the new machine will receive more powerful protection. The gun on the tank will remain the same, but the suspension will undergo changes. The name of the new project, he did not say.

The new tank will use a torsion bar suspension from the BMP-3, which is more reliable and less whimsical than the hydro-pneumatic one in the Sprut

- noted Abdulov.

Recall that the Sprut-SDM1 self-propelled anti-tank unit was developed specifically for the Airborne Forces and because of a strict mass restriction (18 tons) has only bulletproof armor. The arming of the machine is a smooth-bore gun 2А75М caliber 125 mm, which can use the entire range of domestic tank shells.

Earlier it was reported that in the framework of the Army-2018 forum held last year, it was decided to work on the improvement of the Sprut-SDM1 and create on its basis a whole series of combat vehicles designed to perform various tasks.
    Our news channels

    Subscribe and stay up to date with the latest news and the most important events of the day.

    38 comments
    Information
    Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
    1. +4
      1 July 2019 12: 30
      Even Santa Barbara is over, and this series is not going to.
    2. +7
      1 July 2019 12: 34
      Divorced baht likes. Good replacement pt-76
      1. +3
        1 July 2019 12: 51
        Quote: Sergey 777
        Divorced baht likes. Good replacement pt-76

        Pt-76, after abandoning the BTR-50, was driven as a reconnaissance vehicle wherever (mainly in the Far East), but the scouts needed it like a dog's brake light since there was no special equipment on it.
        All due to the fact that with the advent of the first BMP, the need for such a technique disappeared.
        1. +1
          1 July 2019 16: 47
          Quote: Gray Brother
          Quote: Sergey 777
          Divorced baht likes. Good replacement pt-76

          Pt-76, after abandoning the BTR-50, was driven as a reconnaissance vehicle wherever (mainly in the Far East), but the scouts needed it like a dog's brake light since there was no special equipment on it.
          All due to the fact that with the advent of the first BMP, the need for such a technique disappeared.

          I remember that in the reconnaissance battles of the 80s and early 90s, tanks and infantry fighting vehicles were the main equipment, also without any "special equipment". Well, maybe KV R / S in command vehicles. BRM with PSNR were only in a separate observation platoon, and TNA were only on the BRDM of the 3rd platoon of the 3rd battalion company. And that's it. But the PT-76 at least sailed, and the new tanks require a bridge or a crossing, because you can't go too far with OPVT. Well, that's me, grumble.
          1. +1
            1 July 2019 23: 07
            Quote: Doliva63
            Well, it's me, grumble.

            PT-76 were not intended for this initially, it is a fire support vehicle. Tanks are not the right technique.
            PT-76s, for the most part, quickly went to "friendly countries" and were replaced by BMPs and "chaos".
            1. 0
              5 July 2019 19: 58
              Quote: Gray Brother
              Quote: Doliva63
              Well, it's me, grumble.

              PT-76 were not intended for this initially, it is a fire support vehicle. Tanks are not the right technique.
              PT-76s, for the most part, quickly went to "friendly countries" and were replaced by BMPs and "chaos".

              Well, maybe he wasn’t very good for regimental reconnaissance, and he met the tasks of reconnaissance no less than the T-64, for example laughing
        2. +1
          2 July 2019 00: 00
          For the marine corps, the ground forces - an outfit for forcing water barriers in an unaccounted place and seizing bridgeheads ... A good and necessary tool ... and for reconnaissance raids too.
      2. 0
        1 July 2019 15: 03
        Well, for export to third countries it is.
    3. +2
      1 July 2019 12: 43
      What side did the Octopus PTSAU become? What is he not a tank? A fully stabilized gun, an SLA-tank, with an independent sight stabilization system, is FIRING out. The armor on it is like on the same PT-76. The same plywood, only aluminum. Sheathe modular armor, and there is nothing to fool the head! Ah, yes, remove the air suspension!
      1. 0
        1 July 2019 14: 31
        So there was some trick with the order of this car was. Technical requirements developed art.control, because it could not be called a tank. Departmental intrigues.
      2. -1
        1 July 2019 14: 40
        It really is a light tank. There, in addition to the hydropneumatic suspension, you can remove the swimming device. It seems to me that this is unnecessary and complicates the design of the tank. But it would not hurt to curtain it from the heart with dynamic protection. And of course, you shouldn't meddle with tanks. He will be assigned other tasks. By the way, "Dragoon" is from the same series (about light tanks)
        1. 0
          2 July 2019 00: 03
          If it ceases to be waterfowl, then what the hell is it for?
          For all other cases, there is an MBT, it will cope with tasks better.
      3. 0
        1 July 2019 16: 35
        Quote: 113262
        What side did the Octopus PTSAU become?

        Because it was designed exactly as a PTSAU, not a light tank
        Quote: 113262
        What is he not a tank?

        By reservation, he is not capable of covering his infantry with his armor, from the word AT ALL
        Quote: 113262
        Sheathe modular armor, and there is nothing to fool the head! Ah, yes, remove the air suspension!

        Just business ...
        1. 0
          1 July 2019 16: 48
          IT WAS DESIGNED AS A TANK! ITS TRANSMISSION IS DESIGNED FOR SHOOTING on the go, In an ACS-transmission, it is for working from a stop and in a completely inhibited position. For self-propelled guns fatty!
          1. -1
            1 July 2019 16: 49
            Quote: 113262
            The self-propelled transmission is designed to work from a stop and is completely inhibited. For self-propelled guns fatty!

            To survive on the battlefield, the light tank destroyer must be able to do everything, including firing on the move. Moreover, this machine was developed for the Airborne Forces and there is no more heavily armed machine there.
            1. 0
              1 July 2019 17: 32
              What looks like a tank, grows like a tank, is arranged like a tank, and there is a TANK! From an engineering point of view, the way it is! He served on eighty and 64, in Volgograd and Kamyshin examined thoroughly Octopus. No SPGs at all!
              1. -1
                1 July 2019 17: 53
                Quote: 113262
                He served on eighty and 64, in Volgograd and Kamyshin examined thoroughly Octopus. No SPGs at all!

                "Octopuses" are different, the first were on the basis of BMP-3 and they are really ready-made light tanks, for the Airborne Forces they made a very lightweight version, clearly not intended for the position of a light tank
                1. 0
                  1 July 2019 21: 20
                  Octopus development BMD-3. Never had he BMP been inclined to believe this https://www.popmech.ru/weapon/369412-sprut-sd-tank-pritvorivshiysya-sau/#part0
                  1. 0
                    2 July 2019 01: 18
                    Quote: 113262
                    BMP has never been inclined to believe this

                    Yeah ... Verti. Since materials about the BMP-3-125 are in the open press, you are unlikely to find
                    1. 0
                      2 July 2019 08: 40
                      At least, what they showed me-one in one-BMD, with two extra pairs of rollers! They have the same BMP-3-heaven and earth!
    4. -1
      1 July 2019 12: 43
      Interesting, what how much can the BMP-3 base be loaded ...
      1. -3
        1 July 2019 14: 41
        if measured in soldiers, then 40 carcasses can withstand without deformation of the armored corps.
        60 hungry will probably survive.
    5. +3
      1 July 2019 12: 48
      What really paid attention to the Marine Corps? And yes, while Turkey is available, order helicopter carriers from her, about five
      1. -2
        1 July 2019 12: 57
        Quote: Saboteur Holuay
        attention to the marines?

        On the Indonesian campaign - they buy BT-ZF and they need a fire support vehicle for him.
      2. +2
        1 July 2019 13: 49
        a family of planing machines is being developed for marines, so this is unlikely to be used
    6. -2
      1 July 2019 12: 49
      Need it? Obviously. So it will be ...
    7. -3
      1 July 2019 12: 52
      it seems that we are exchanging: cruisers for frigates; heavy tanks to medium
      there is some kind of miniaturization
      but in fact we’re just expanding the range of equipment for various specifics
      someone will say that they are sawing the budget, as for me - let them saw, especially through hidden budget items
      and so, for more different output techniques
    8. 0
      1 July 2019 13: 02
      What for??? What will it give, what are the benefits ????
    9. 0
      1 July 2019 13: 05
      Chassis Kurshantsa will be stronger.
      1. -1
        1 July 2019 14: 42
        Quote: Zaurbek
        Chassis Kurshantsa will be stronger.

        So let him put BM from Octopus. But this is in 10 years, as always with us.
    10. Hog
      +1
      1 July 2019 13: 06
      New toy for export
      1. 0
        1 July 2019 13: 24
        For export, but not a toy. The countries of Southeast Asia and Latin America are hot subtropics mixed with mountains.
    11. +2
      1 July 2019 13: 36
      Ohrenet !!!!! They did not put Octopus into service, although the paratroopers were waiting for him, they had already taken up a new one. By the way, and active defense was ready, and many other lotions.
      1. 0
        1 July 2019 20: 38
        paratroopers don’t put an armament into service just because there is no landing platform for it, and they don’t develop a platform, because in future they will only drop equipment for the parade, and there will be no maximum mass ejection - a platoon
    12. +3
      1 July 2019 13: 48
      Unlike the Sprut, the new tank will not be airborne, but will remain floating.

      As far as I understand, the amphibious assault force will have a means of fire support in the form of a modification of the "Sprut" and possibly (probably, perhaps, in the near future) a means for transporting troops by sea in waves of up to (???) points ... however, the strategy is very clear.
      Although you can understand the renewal of the fleet of amphibious tanks. In the upcoming military confrontation at the (???) theater of operations, it may even come in handy ...
      I don’t understand one thing, why does the impression of the confusion of the great military strategy not disappear? Or is there again a "great cut" of budget funds? But how can we understand this when they plan one thing, then decide to modernize the other, refuse the third as unnecessary and still return to the old solutions verified by Soviet designers ...
      belay
    13. The comment was deleted.
    14. 0
      1 July 2019 14: 20
      I still think that the tank will go to the marines.
    15. 0
      1 July 2019 16: 28
      According to the chief designer of SKBM, a new light tank is being developed on the basis of the Sprut-SDM1.

      The lack of airborne capabilities removes the weight restrictions from the new light tank, due to which the Sprut has only bulletproof armor and, thus, the new vehicle will receive more powerful protection.

      The gun on the tank will remain the same, but the chassis will undergo changes.

      In fact, this is not a new project, but a modification of an existing one (not to be confused, not modernization).
      So why fence the garden and create a new project?
      He did not disclose the name of the new project.

      Unclear. Or maybe just, okay?
    16. +1
      1 July 2019 22: 57
      I think that then it’s a BMP 3m funeral. There is no sense in them, because will be Kurganets 25 in weight 25t
      But a mini tank with Armatov rinks and a small compartment for landing (up to 4 people) will be very sabotage. For armor protection from any rifle to 14,5 in the weight of 21 tons, + the possibility of additional weight of the armor of 3-4 tons, to the level of protection of the middle platform (Kurgan 25).
      The forehead should hold 30 mm in the base case.
      There are modules - 30 mm boomerang, 57 mm era, 125 mm from the SDM octopus, as I see it with melon, you need to work out and give out the rate of fire and accuracy - versatility both from ground targets and Air Defense then.
      KAZ is required.
    17. 0
      3 July 2019 18: 21
      The gun on the tank will remain the same
      And this is sad, because the 2A75M gun is hopelessly outdated. 2A82 of the same caliber - it needs to be put both on the airborne version and on the others - it is still relevant. Otherwise, it turns out meaningless garbage, which not only does not have armor, but also normal anti-tank weapons. But as I see it, this is done on purpose.

    "Right Sector" (banned in Russia), "Ukrainian Insurgent Army" (UPA) (banned in Russia), ISIS (banned in Russia), "Jabhat Fatah al-Sham" formerly "Jabhat al-Nusra" (banned in Russia) , Taliban (banned in Russia), Al-Qaeda (banned in Russia), Anti-Corruption Foundation (banned in Russia), Navalny Headquarters (banned in Russia), Facebook (banned in Russia), Instagram (banned in Russia), Meta (banned in Russia), Misanthropic Division (banned in Russia), Azov (banned in Russia), Muslim Brotherhood (banned in Russia), Aum Shinrikyo (banned in Russia), AUE (banned in Russia), UNA-UNSO (banned in Russia), Mejlis of the Crimean Tatar People (banned in Russia), Legion “Freedom of Russia” (armed formation, recognized as terrorist in the Russian Federation and banned)

    “Non-profit organizations, unregistered public associations or individuals performing the functions of a foreign agent,” as well as media outlets performing the functions of a foreign agent: “Medusa”; "Voice of America"; "Realities"; "Present time"; "Radio Freedom"; Ponomarev; Savitskaya; Markelov; Kamalyagin; Apakhonchich; Makarevich; Dud; Gordon; Zhdanov; Medvedev; Fedorov; "Owl"; "Alliance of Doctors"; "RKK" "Levada Center"; "Memorial"; "Voice"; "Person and law"; "Rain"; "Mediazone"; "Deutsche Welle"; QMS "Caucasian Knot"; "Insider"; "New Newspaper"