Military Review

BMP-3 will receive protection from shells and missiles

146
Currently, the BMP-3 is the most advanced infantry fighting vehicle in service with the Russian army. Officially adopted in the 1987 year, the combat vehicle still has the potential for modernization and, in the future, will serve the military for more than a decade. Today, the Russian army is armed with more than 500 BMP-3, in addition to this, the infantry fighting vehicle was quite actively exported and is in service with the armies of Azerbaijan, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, Venezuela, Indonesia and other states.



The main difference between the BMP-3 and most infantry fighting vehicles of other countries is a fairly powerful weapon, which is represented by an 100-mm gun / launcher and an 30-mm automatic gun. In addition, the BMP is armed with three 7,62-mm machine guns at once, two course and one PKT machine gun, paired with an artillery mount. The second main difference from competitors is that a machine weighing more than 18 tons is able to swim, overcoming water obstacles at a speed of up to 10 km / h. Recently, Russia has presented several options for upgrading the BMP-3, including the BMP-3M Dragun variant. And in mid-August of 2019, a representative of Rostec state corporation announced that the machines would be seriously modernized, primarily due to an increase in the level of protection, including the installation of active protection systems.

The protection of the BMP-3 will be tripled


As told reporters RIA News Sergey Abramov, who holds the post of industrial director of the conventional arms cluster, ammunition and special chemicals of the Rostec state corporation, is planning to equip the Russian BMP-3 with new active defense equipment during the modernization process. Thanks to an integrated approach, the protection of infantry fighting vehicles is planned to be increased several times. According to a senior representative of Rostec, the modernization potential of the last of the adopted Russian infantry fighting vehicles has not yet exhausted itself. In Russia, work is underway to create new systems for protecting BMPs against ballistic weapons, which include the widely spread worldwide CNG-9 and the RPG-7 hand grenade launcher. Currently, Rostec enterprises are working to strengthen the passive protection of the BMP-3, and are also working on various options for integrating modern active defense systems (KAZ) into the combat vehicle.

Under the complex of active protection means a kind of protection of armored vehicles from various means of destruction. KAZ is a system that is responsible for the detection of approaching tank or BMP of ammunition (anti-tank missiles and grenades, as well as shells) and counteraction to such ammunition in various ways from jamming to the destruction of incoming shells or their damage and weakening the damaging effect. As noted by Sergey Abramov, the use of such systems can increase the survivability of armored vehicles on the battlefield by about two to three times.


At the same time, the representative of the state corporation did not specify which KAZ will be installed on the upgraded versions of the BMP-3. Theoretically, this can be a modernized Arena complex, which was developed in the USSR in the 1980 years, or a new generation complex, called Afganit. This active defense system was specially created for installation on armored vehicles built on the basis of the Armata heavy tracked platform, primarily on the T-14 main battle tank and the T-15 infantry fighting vehicle. Separate components of the complex "Afganit" can be installed on other models of armored vehicles, including the promising Russian BMP "Kurganets-25".

Modern Russian active protection systems


At one time, the Soviet Union broke far ahead in the field of creating active defense systems for armored vehicles. Soviet engineers began to create the first such systems back in the 1970-ies, and already in the 1983 year in the USSR, the world's first KAZ, called "Drozd", was adopted. It was this active defense complex that became the first in the world to be mass-produced.

One of the options for upgrading the BMP-3 may be the installation on a combat vehicle of a modernized version of the Arena active defense system developed at the end of the 1980's. This version of the KAZ provides armored vehicles with protection against various types of anti-tank grenades and anti-tank guided missiles, it is also reported that the complex can hit cumulative shells. In Russia, an export version of this complex, which has received the designation “Arena-E,” has also been created. The complex includes a multifunctional radar and protective ammunition, which are fired towards the means of destruction approaching the tank. Narrowly targeted protective ammunition provides reliable destruction of missiles, grenades and cumulative shells with a beam of damaging elements. Moreover, the complex is all-weather, all-day and has excellent noise immunity.

BMP-3 with KAZ Arena

Installation options for KAZ Arena on the BMP-3 were undertaken. As far back as 2003 in Russia, the BMP-3M variant with the Arena-E system installed was demonstrated, which made it possible to hit various types of ammunition flying up to a combat vehicle. The complex is effective against weapons flying at speeds from 70 to 700 m / s. Since the complex works completely in automatic mode, its use does not impose any additional load on the crews of armored military equipment.

A more sophisticated set of active defense is the "Afganit", which was specially designed for installation on armored vehicles, created on the basis of the heavy tracked platform "Armata". At the same time, experts note that there are no serious restrictions that would not allow the installation of the complex “Afganit” or its components on the armored vehicles of previous generations, including the BMP-3. The only serious obstacle may be only the cost of such a complex. A high-tech and complex system is quite expensive and it is the price that can become the factor that will erase any benefits from such an upgrade option. So far, “Afganit” could be seen only on “Armata”, “Kurganets” and “Boomerang”, which repeatedly became participants in various military parades.

A distinctive feature of the complex “Afganit” is the presence of a radar with an active phased antenna array (AFAR), made using the same technology as that of a radar mounted on a fifth-generation Russian fighter Su-57. The AFAR radar mounted on armored vehicles includes four panels that are located on the tank turret, providing 360 degrees of view without turning the turret and rotating the radar. In addition to these elements, the complex includes ultraviolet direction finders for ATGM launches and infrared cameras. At the same time, the active defense installed on the T-14 Armata tanks is able to cope not only with modern ATGMs and cumulative grenades, but also allows intercepting high-speed armor-piercing piercing shells (APCs). In addition to the active destruction of flying ammunition, the system can activate the installation of a smokemetal or aerosol curtain.

BMP-3 will receive protection from shells and missiles
Version of the arrangement of Afghanit devices on the turret of the T-14 tank

Moreover, all KAZ complexes have the same drawback. The striking elements launched towards the approaching projectile pose a danger to the infantry surrounding the tank. For example, the developers of the Arena complex noted that the danger zone for infantrymen was 20-30 meters near the tank, while the protection of the tank itself or the infantry fighting vehicle poses no threat. For this reason, armored vehicles equipped with KAZ systems are forced to operate in isolation from infantry orders. For tanks, acting in isolation from the infantry is much simpler than for infantry fighting vehicles, which are designed to transport soldiers to the battlefield. Thus, the installation of KAZ on infantry fighting vehicles leads to a revision of the concept of their combat use and use on the battlefield, as well as the subsequent development of such use in exercises at all levels.

BMP-3M "Dragoon"


In 2015, two novelties of the domestic defense industry were presented to Russian viewers at an exhibition in Nizhny Tagil - the seriously modernized BMP-3M "Dragun" and self-propelled anti-aircraft artillery based on the BMP-3, armed with the new 57-mm automatic gun. ZSU received the designation "Derivation-Air Defense". Both novelties of the Russian defense industry are of great interest, they are able to extend the life of the BMP-3 for many decades.

At the same time, the BMP-3M "Dragoon", in fact, is already a completely different machine. The infantry fighting vehicle has undergone major processing, and it is not only about changing the layout of the BMP. From the old BMP, only the chassis and hull elements are left here. At the same time, the motor-transmission compartment was moved to the front of the machine, which increases the security of the paratroopers and crew. In fact, it was only in Dragoon that Russian designers turned to the layout classic for infantry fighting vehicles of other countries. In addition to additional protection for the landing party and crew, this solution improves the process of loading and unloading paratroopers from infantry fighting vehicles due to the appearance of a stern ramp. The full combat crew of the updated BMP model is 11 people, including three crew members.

BMP-3M "Dragoon"

The second noticeable difference of the updated BMP is the completely uninhabited turret, which retained the same armament from the 100-mm semi-automatic gun, 30-mm automatic gun and 7,62-mm PKT machine gun. The crewless combat module made it possible to place all crew members inside the combat vehicle hull behind the engine, which made it possible to increase their protection.

The mass of the combat vehicle, which received improved protection, grew to 21 tons. At the same time, the designers installed a new multi-fuel UTD-32 multi-fuel engine at BMP Dragun, which develops 816 horsepower. This allowed us to achieve excellent power density indicators - up to 38 hp. per ton, it is much better than most of the main battle tanks and infantry fighting vehicles of various countries of the world. For example, this is almost twice as much as the main American Bradley M2 BMP. At the same time, the BMP-3M Dragun is able to accelerate along the highway to a speed exceeding 70 km / h. Despite the increased combat weight, the stout Dragun retained the ability to sail at speeds up to 10 km / h.

The combat capabilities of infantry fighting vehicles have grown due to the use of a modern fire control system, as well as the duplication of crew functions. The jobs of the commander of the combat vehicle and the gunner are completely unified, in addition to this, the electronic filling of the combat vehicle has been replenished with a built-in automatic target tracking system. At the same time, it can be noted that at any of the exhibitions the deepest modernization of the BMP-3 has not yet been demonstrated along with the installed active protection system.
Author:
146 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. TARSUS
    TARSUS 25 August 2019 07: 29
    +2
    The conclusion can be made unequivocally, armored vehicles on the Armata platform, the Russian Armed Forces will not wait. Well, at least at parades and exhibitions, the eyes will please.
    1. svp67
      svp67 25 August 2019 10: 47
      +4
      Quote: TARS
      armored vehicles on the Armata platform

      You have a strange idea. Amateurish. "Armata" and equipment based on it will not be a complete replacement for all equipment in the RF Armed Forces. There should be this and a lighter technique. And here it is necessary to start with the production of the BMP-3M "Dragoon", as a more secure modification of the "light" BMP, capable of quickly appearing on the assembly line.
      1. TARSUS
        TARSUS 25 August 2019 11: 06
        +9
        And Kurganets-25 is not an easier technique? Wasn't it designed to replace all types of bmp? In general, I can’t stop wondering how the delays are justified, and moreover, the cancellation of the supply of new equipment ...
        1. svp67
          svp67 25 August 2019 11: 14
          0
          Quote: TARS
          And Kurganets-25 is not a lighter technique?

          Is an. So let's compare which is better BMP-3M or "Kurganets-25"
          Quote: TARS
          In general, I can’t stop wondering how the delays are justified, and moreover, the cancellation of the supply of new equipment ...

          Military equipment is too expensive to change every season.
          As it was a long time ago, your specialists offered here such a very good, just wonderful Combat Reconnaissance Vehicle

          And what a lot of them are now in the army of Belarus?
          1. TARSUS
            TARSUS 25 August 2019 11: 20
            +7
            Yeah, I don’t know what to say. You are already going to prove to me that BMP3 is better than Kurgan ... Let the designers know that they screwed up with their development.
            I say, as soon as the cancellation of the supply of new equipment is not justified.
            1. svp67
              svp67 25 August 2019 11: 25
              +6
              Quote: TARS
              You are already going to prove to me that the BMP3 is better than Kurganets.

              No, not the BMP-3, but the BMP-3M. Dragoon is in many ways a completely different machine


              Quote: TARS
              Let the designers know that they screwed up with their development.

              I do not need to do this, they already know the true state of affairs better than me. Especially with the problems of the Kurganmashzavod, which from year to year disrupts the supply of the BMP-3, which has long been worked out in production, and then the transition to a completely new machine.
              Quote: TARS
              I say, as soon as the cancellation of the supply of new equipment is not justified.

              And you try not to speak, but to do something, that would not be so. Get the Stalker BRM to start production
              And for the sake of interest, here are the T-90, Kurganets-25 and T-80BV models made in the same scale

              BPM-1 and Kurganets-25 models in one scale
              1. TARSUS
                TARSUS 25 August 2019 11: 55
                +4
                I understand what you are hinting at. Well, with such logic as you about the dimensions of the equipment, it can be said that the T-14 is also a flawed equipment. That one shed, 3,5 meters high.
                Oh, such a mind disappears, why are you not sitting in the design office? Where is MO looking?
                1. svp67
                  svp67 25 August 2019 12: 07
                  +3
                  Quote: TARS
                  Well, with the same logic as yours about the dimensions of the equipment, we can say that the T-14 is also a flawed equipment. That shed, height 3,5 meters.

                  "Shed" is "shed", but the same T-15 is much stronger armored.
                  Quote: TARS
                  Where is MO looking?

                  It guards my personal business, that would be covered with an even layer of dust and not be lost
                  1. TARSUS
                    TARSUS 25 August 2019 12: 19
                    0
                    And what is the relationship between t-14 and t-15? Completely different classes of technology.
                    1. svp67
                      svp67 25 August 2019 12: 23
                      0
                      Quote: TARS
                      And what is the relationship between t-14 and t-15? Completely different classes of technology.

                      Actually, the T-14 is a tank, and if we compare the Kurganets, then with the T-15, this is an infantry fighting vehicle
                      1. TARSUS
                        TARSUS 25 August 2019 14: 01
                        -3
                        Yeah .... How do you have enough thought to compare the T-15 and Kurganets 25? These are absolutely 2 different classes of cars. It is the same as comparing a sedan and an SUV. fool
                      2. svp67
                        svp67 25 August 2019 14: 14
                        +4
                        Quote: TARS
                        This is absolutely 2 of different class cars. It’s the same as comparing a sedan and an SUV.

                        Excuse me, but how did you think of comparing a tank with an infantry fighting vehicle? This did not bother you. And I'm sorry, but two machines that are similar in purpose, namely those designed to transport, shelter and support the fire of their infantry, can be compared.
                      3. TARSUS
                        TARSUS 25 August 2019 14: 16
                        +1
                        Screen in the studio, where I compare the tank with the bmp. Or I’m recording you in balabol.
                      4. svp67
                        svp67 25 August 2019 14: 17
                        -2
                        Quote: TARS
                        Screen in the studio, where I compare the tank with the bmp. Or I’m recording you in balabol.

                        Please
                        Quote: TARS
                        Well, with the same logic as yours about the dimensions of the equipment, we can say that the T-14 is also a flawed equipment. That shed, height 3,5 meters.
                      5. TARSUS
                        TARSUS 25 August 2019 14: 20
                        +1
                        And where am I comparing the T-14 with BMP ??? Do you see the abbreviation BMP? Me not. And what you see, only you know.
                      6. svp67
                        svp67 25 August 2019 14: 27
                        +1
                        Quote: TARS
                        And where am I comparing T-14 with BMP ???

                        And what, if not this, within the meaning of our argument, were you trying to say?
                        I showed you that the dimensions of the Kurganets are significant, larger than all our massive armored vehicles. You answered that the T-14 also has a high height, that is, you compared these armored vehicles ("Armata" and "Kurganets") according to one of their characteristics. Is there something wrong?
                        Then explain what you wanted to say with this statement. You are welcome
                      7. TARSUS
                        TARSUS 25 August 2019 14: 34
                        0
                        How complicated it is for you ... You yourself threw pictures of models where you compare Kurganets 25 with T-80 and T-90 MBTs, with a hint they say look at the new BMP in dimensions larger than our old MBTs and wrote it to her in a minus. And following your logic, I and T-14 set a minus, because this is probably the highest in size armored vehicles from the existing one. And I did not compare anything with any BMP. Now everyone has caught? Or still have questions?
                      8. svp67
                        svp67 25 August 2019 14: 38
                        +2
                        Quote: TARS
                        You yourself have thrown to me pictures of models where you compare Kurganets 25 with MBT T-80 and T-90,
                        Yes, but there was also a comparison of BMP-1 and Kurganets, but comparison with tanks characterizes this BMP better in size
                        Quote: TARS
                        And following your logic, I and T-14 set a minus, because this is probably the highest in size armored vehicles from the existing one.

                        So I understood you correctly. I just decided, for the sake of the purity of the dispute, to further compare the BMP, and therefore replied that the T-15 is much better protected, with dimensions similar to the Kurganets in height. I hope this is clear.
          2. TARSUS
            TARSUS 25 August 2019 11: 47
            -6
            Unlike Russia, RB does not fight anywhere this time, and therefore a new technique is unnecessary for it. And secondly, she does not chase her at parades with the phrase "has no analogues in the world."
            1. svp67
              svp67 25 August 2019 11: 56
              +4
              Quote: TARS
              And secondly, she does not chase her at parades with the phrase "has no analogues in the world."

              Probably because of this you are collaborating with China in the design and manufacture of your military equipment.
            2. CommanderDIVA
              CommanderDIVA 25 August 2019 13: 50
              +6
              Because you have nothing to drive in the parades of a new BBM, but because you don’t fight, it’s because under the umbrella of the Russian Federation
              1. TARSUS
                TARSUS 25 August 2019 15: 43
                -2
                You might think that if we were not under the wing of Russia, then we would have walked Bandera with liquid reptiloids and hardened the genocide of the population.
            3. My doctor
              My doctor 25 August 2019 20: 58
              0
              Quote: TARS
              And secondly, she does not chase her at parades with the phrase "has no analogues in the world."

              A PCZO BM-21 (BelGrad) and B-200 (Polonaise)
            4. bayard
              bayard 26 August 2019 15: 29
              +3
              Quote: TARS
              Unlike Russia, RB does not fight anywhere this time, and therefore a new technique is unnecessary for it. And secondly, she does not chase her at parades with the phrase "has no analogues in the world."

              You would, Maxim, with such a mentality on our forum less fidget. How has OUR technology excited you so much?
              She is NOT YOURS.
              It’s not for you to exploit it.
              You do not fight on it.
              And if you want to show off your "wunderwaffe" - you are welcome.

              And on the subject, "Kurganets" is not needed in the army for nothing. And this is practically the consolidated opinion of the frontline officers. After the first demonstration, it was dubbed "the grenade launcher's dream." And its price will make any military budget shudder. Therefore, the BMP-3 in the Dragoon modification looks (and is) an ideal alternative to this coffin on a caterpillar track (Kurganets-25).
              And the equipment based on the Armata platform is being supplied to the troops, but as it should be for new and still raw equipment - on a limited scale. And the troops are massively receiving modernized T-72 \ 80 \ 90 tanks - these are weapons for war, reliable, proven, sufficient (!) In terms of characteristics.
              In the Russian Army there is a lot of "unparalleled" things, just as there was in the Soviet Army - this is an objective reality that does not need proof. There is a need for this, therefore, corresponding samples appear. But if semi-literate journalists start promoting some new weapon, this does not mean at all that the troops really need it. "Kurganets-25", "Boomerang" and a ruler on the "Armata" platform were ordered by Dmitry Medvedev during his "supreme command", and now no one wants to see the result of HIS initiatives in the troops, even on the "Armata" they are crooked, remembering ruined by the T-95.
              Common sense requires troops upgraded T-72 \ 80 \ 90 in quantities of goods at a reasonable price. And sound thought conquers and materializes.
      2. VO3A
        VO3A 25 August 2019 12: 54
        +5
        Thus, the installation of KAZ on infantry fighting vehicles leads to a revision of the concept of their combat use and use on the battlefield, as well as the subsequent development of such use in exercises at all levels.

        Everything was fine until the author got into tactics ... You need to understand that the technique is done for tactics, and not the tactics for the new technique .... We have everything ...
        What is the battlefield? What infantry, what trenches? Why do we need tanks, infantry fighting vehicles, motorized rifle in a modern war? Does anyone know this on the forum? Do they know this at the General Staff? It seems that not? The stupidity in evaluating the tactical methods of the enemy among our military commanders is comparable with the opinion about the tactics of our equestrians at the beginning of the Great Patriotic War ... Tell me cool, bent ?! And the losses from this stupidity will also be so?
        Let's return the horses and bows to the army and change and practice tactics in the exercises ...
      3. English tarantas
        English tarantas 25 August 2019 16: 58
        +2
        BMP-3M "Dragoon", as a more protected modification of the "light" BMP

        In my opinion, a BMP that carries a couple of dozen OFSs of 100 mm caliber and a sea of ​​other ammunition inside it, without having an all-round tank level reservation, in principle, cannot be called protected.
      4. Saxahorse
        Saxahorse 25 August 2019 19: 45
        -3
        Quote: svp67
        You have a strange idea. Amateurish. "Armata" and equipment based on it will not completely replace all equipment in the RF Armed Forces

        Of course it won't. Armata is really rubbish. Huge in size (and price) the machine has absolutely no advantages over the main tanks of today.
    2. snerg7520
      snerg7520 25 August 2019 15: 27
      +2
      Do not argue with this troll. He just needed to throw srach and work out the cookies.
    3. snerg7520
      snerg7520 25 August 2019 15: 37
      0
      By the way, how is it known that the troll aka TARS from Belarus? I don’t see any state flags at all, I used to have them, then they somehow disappeared imperceptibly. Maybe Firefox is racially wrong browser and does not display flags?
      1. TARSUS
        TARSUS 25 August 2019 16: 03
        +1
        Opana, they took it like that and hung a label. Justify your words or not?
        Or do you automatically trigger the trigger, if you criticize Russian, then immediately Ukrainian and Bendera?
        I am from Belarus, do not hesitate.
      2. TARSUS
        TARSUS 25 August 2019 16: 37
        +1
        Although what you can talk about with a person with such an avatar, everything is clear here.
        1. cat Rusich
          cat Rusich 26 August 2019 22: 06
          0
          It's just that a person does not eat "bacon" - perhaps he prefers other types of meat ... hi
  2. Pivot
    Pivot 25 August 2019 07: 34
    0
    The machine is good, but I think it is aimed at exporting. Ours made a choice in favor of Kurganets.
    1. Private-K
      Private-K 25 August 2019 08: 12
      0
      The article also says that the Russian BMP-3 will be upgraded.
      1. Angelica
        Angelica 25 August 2019 15: 34
        0
        It does not interfere.
        The modernization of the BMP-3 does not interfere with the supply of new BMPs with other characteristics.
        BMP-3 and thousands are not recruited in our army. And this is extremely small. So, there will be enough space for both the Kurgan and BMP based on the Armata platform.
        1. Private-K
          Private-K 25 August 2019 17: 12
          +1
          The fact is that the author of the posting above stated that the modernized BMP-3 for export.
          I, for him, specifically replied that the article explicitly stated - a car for the Russian Federation.
          Well, I agree with you: the army is large and the different sizes of BTVs are inevitable. But there are some pluses to this: methodically and gradually changing some of the vehicles to improved options and new models.
        2. Saxahorse
          Saxahorse 25 August 2019 19: 51
          -5
          Quote: angelica
          BMP-3 and thousands are not recruited in our army. And this is extremely small.

          And thank God. BMP-3 frank trash, and how BMP is not worth a penny. Only the Arabs and shoved, they will arrange everything that is more expensive ..
    2. svp67
      svp67 25 August 2019 11: 34
      0
      Quote: Pivot
      Ours made a choice in favor of Kurganets.

      It remains to understand who are "our"?
      Since the military and the leadership of the Kurganmashzavod, there are many different views.
      1. Pivot
        Pivot 26 August 2019 08: 56
        0
        Well, time will tell. But there will not be one BMP3M in the troops, just three will be, but 3M will not.
  3. V1er
    V1er 25 August 2019 07: 47
    -3
    Moreover, all KAZ complexes have the same drawback. The striking elements launched towards the approaching projectile pose a danger to the infantry surrounding the tank. For example, the developers of the Arena complex noted that the danger zone for infantrymen was 20-30 meters near the tank, while such protection does not pose any threat to the tank itself or infantry fighting vehicle.

    Well yes. And the defeat of an expensive tank, a combat unit at the time of the battle, where it could save lives, the death of a trained crew, perhaps an experienced one, is this not a disadvantage and danger? In addition, having lost a tank, the infantry remains naked, some BMP can leave and spray the "surviving" infantry with lead from a 30mm cannon. This behu could have been hit by a tank that survived under the protection of KAZ. It's time to rework the concept of combat. For example, launch tanks and BMPs with KAZ ahead. Have a switchable KAZ. It is interesting to hear the opinions of experts, who understands this? Are Jews and Americans so stupid that they began to put these KAZ almost on motorcycles (exaggerating)?
    1. Private-K
      Private-K 25 August 2019 08: 17
      +3
      Of course, the installation on infantry fighting vehicles and KAZ tanks requires the adjustment of tactics, techniques and methods of combat employment of integrated combat formations of ground forces.
      Of course, research has been ongoing for many years, and since 2012 - actively.
      Of course, there are already ready relevant proposals, instructions.
      Of course, you will have to make adjustments to the bushes of the mid-2000s (which is still a hassle).
    2. Grigory_45
      Grigory_45 25 August 2019 08: 39
      0
      Quote: V1er
      It's time to rework the concept of battle

      it's time.
      Quote: V1er
      Have a disconnected KAZ

      All Russian KAZ, as well as foreign ones, are also disconnected. They have two modes of operation: automatic (regular, main mode) and manual control (when the commander of the machine gives the command to fire the projectiles. The same mode can be used to destroy enemy infantry). Or KAZ can be turned off altogether - in case of malfunctions, during the firing of all anti-shells, or if its operation is undesirable (unmasking by radar radiation, proximity of its own infantry, etc.)
    3. donavi49
      donavi49 25 August 2019 08: 45
      0
      Well, here they go on the attack, then bam alahbabahi Tou pointed = bang, the rocket was shot down but half of the squad was minced. Others, seeing the picture, lie down and run away from the armored vehicles (and if it’s natives or Syrians / Iraqis = then they immediately change shoes for the Olympians and pass the standard for long-distance races). The armored vehicles, having lost infantry, are turned back to the initial ones, simultaneously catching a couple more of the Tou.
      1. Grigory_45
        Grigory_45 25 August 2019 09: 01
        +4
        Quote: donavi49
        Well, here they go on the attack, then bam alahbabahi Tou pointed = bang, the rocket was shot down but half of the squad was minced.

        imagine a different picture. The infantry presses on the armor, it catches the rocket - an explosion of ammunition, all in forcemeat. It's better?

        Do not be afraid of KAZ, there is a danger, but exaggerated. The fragments from the projectile do not fly away in all directions, but in a directional direction, as a rule from above in the attacking ammunition. Zone possible defeat (it’s not necessary that KAZ will kill someone or a welt with fragments of a KAZ projectile) is not so great. We need to reconsider battle formations and tactics.
        As an option - let the cars forward with the KAZ turned on, the rest move behind them.
        1. Graz
          Graz 25 August 2019 09: 51
          0
          as an option ahead send a robot like uranium -9 with KAZ so that it would open firing points and catch shots of rifles and RPGs, plus the quadcopter of the motorized rifle unit should hang and show a picture of the battle from above, tactics should be adapted to modern conditions of war, no need to think in categories past wars, a unit equipped in a new way will be more effective than 2-3 old ones, we will save on innovations, as a result, we will lose in human losses, and we won’t win anything in money either
          1. Red_Baron
            Red_Baron 25 August 2019 11: 13
            +3
            Uh, this is not a computer game for you. Uranus-9 is likely to catch a high-explosive shell right there and fail. Or the turn of a small-caliber gun or something else. He is not at all for this. From above, the quadrocopter will indicate where to shoot the enemy artillery.
            What is the picture of the battle? The picture is already visible - we’ve been fighting for centuries. And the technique must still be discovered, there are also no fools sitting opposite.
            And no one saves on innovations, there is simply a question of reasonable sufficiency this time. And there are two finances. Everything will be possible to move to new rails, but it is not so fast and easy. Even in the same USA - the richest military economy. Even having received ready-made KAZ, the transition is proceeding slowly and not very massively.
            1. Graz
              Graz 25 August 2019 11: 22
              +4
              do you hear yourself, that is, you send motorized rifles to a pre-shot area with enemy artillery, with camouflaged armored vehicles? What kind of booth is this, motorized riflemen are already sent for mopping up, after suppressing the enemy’s heavy weapons on the ground, and not in a meat grinder as you suggest
              1. ProkletyiPirat
                ProkletyiPirat 25 August 2019 13: 47
                0
                Quote: Graz
                What a booth

                This farce is called "modern war" and in it "watering everyone from art and hail" does not work, of course not, but this is a useless waste of ammunition (because the enemy is no longer there or he is covered with fortifications or the cost of destruction is higher than the cost of the destroyed one).
              2. Red_Baron
                Red_Baron 25 August 2019 14: 59
                0
                Yes, I can hear myself. Can you quote where I offered what you described? something very much looks like a "booth", using your jargon.
                You just felt sorry for criticizing your great plans and you began to misinterpret my words and be rude.
                I repeat once again that Uranus-9 is designed for a completely different one, it will not withstand any lights on itself in any reservation. And no one can stand it.
                About intelligence. "Ground tactical reconnaissance is carried out by reconnaissance, motorized rifle, airborne and airborne assault, regimental subunits. Observers, observation posts, patrol squads (tanks), reconnaissance, combat reconnaissance, separate reconnaissance, officer reconnaissance patrols, reconnaissance groups, groups for conducting searches, ambushes, subunits for conducting reconnaissance in force. "
                I understand that you decided to replace all these activities with a small-sized robot? good luck!
                I would like to point out to you the word "motorized rifle" as subunits, which, among other things, conduct intelligence. I understand that somewhere here you have a "meat grinder"?
            2. VeteranVSSSR
              VeteranVSSSR 25 August 2019 20: 21
              0
              ,, ... or the burst of a small-caliber cannon or something ... ''
              There are no or-small fleas, and guns are small.
        2. riwas
          riwas 25 August 2019 10: 26
          +3
          Israel was able to minimize losses about KAZ
          14.07.2014/4/2014 the system protected the Tank Merkava 29 on the border of the Gaza Strip. During the July XNUMX conflict, the system managed to intercept the shots of anti-tank weapons such as RPG-XNUMX, Konkurs and Kornet anti-tank systems. There is evidence that an infantry support officer was easily injured by fragments of Trophy.

          en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trophy

          And the German KAZ works vertically down, which should reduce losses to almost zero
          https://topwar.ru/8579-nemeckiy-kaz.html
          1. Red_Baron
            Red_Baron 25 August 2019 11: 15
            0
            Quote: riwas
            And the German KAZ works vertically down, which should reduce losses to almost zero

            How, for example, should she deal with high-speed ammunition?
            But what about the ATGMs that attack from above? And how will she shoot down cumulative shells from a long distance?
            Something seems to me that this is not a panacea at all.
            1. ProkletyiPirat
              ProkletyiPirat 25 August 2019 13: 54
              0
              Quote: Red_Baron
              Something seems to me that this is not a panacea at all.

              In practice, ANY existing KAZ for ground equipment is not profitable simply because where it can work, you can do without it at the expense of other tools / methods, and where other tools / methods do not work, KAZ does not work due to its failure the adversary. This is the main obstacle to the implementation of KAZ on ground equipment.
              1. Red_Baron
                Red_Baron 25 August 2019 15: 03
                -1
                Well, finally, at least with you on the merits. I’m tired of writing this, because there is always a cry - how to fight without KAZ, this is a meat grinder, you don’t feel sorry for the soldiers.
                In my opinion, KAZ is an extreme measure, hedging where possible or an error has already occurred in other measures.
                1. ProkletyiPirat
                  ProkletyiPirat 25 August 2019 16: 29
                  0
                  Quote: Red_Baron
                  In my opinion, KAZ is an extreme measure, hedging where possible or has already occurred an error in other measures.

                  This is very beneficial to "insurance" companies producing KAZ, only the soldier is more profitable not life insurance, but life itself, and it, in turn, is achieved by other means and methods. Primarily by means of reconnaissance and tactical awareness in real time. In the second place, robotic reconnaissance and strike means.
            2. Grigory_45
              Grigory_45 25 August 2019 16: 48
              -2
              Quote: Red_Baron
              How, for example, should she deal with high-speed ammunition?

              no way. Such a task is not set for KAZ for light armored vehicles. The task is to work out the most common types of grenades and ATGMs.

              Quote: Red_Baron
              But what about the ATGMs that attack from above?

              they are not shot down and KAZ mounted on tanks. For this, its own system is KZWP, a complex for protecting the upper hemisphere.

              Quote: Red_Baron
              And how will she shoot down cumulative shells from a long distance?

              and then what's wrong? Or, do you wish KAZ to intercept grenades half a kilometer from the protected machine?

              Quote: Red_Baron
              Something seems to me it's not a panacea at all

              and no one has ever considered KAZ a panacea. It is a means of increasing combat survivability, which does not mean that a machine with KAZ becomes invulnerable.

              In my opinion, much distort. Either consciously (provocation), or from ignorance. Which option is correct?
      2. venik
        venik 25 August 2019 11: 39
        +2
        Quote: donavi49
        Well, here they go on the attack, then bam alahbabahi Tou pointed = bang, the rocket was shot down but half of the squad was minced.

        ========
        Uh-huh! And in your opinion, is it difficult to envisage a system (program) blocking the shooting of submunitions into the rear hemisphere after the landing? Then the KAZ will protect the vehicle from frontal shelling or shelling "from the front / side", and from shelling "from behind / from the side" it should cover the landing (at short distances), and from the shelling of ATGMs from long range (into the rear hemisphere) - protection will be provided by aerosol or metal smoke screens.
        Somewhere like that!
    4. Red_Baron
      Red_Baron 25 August 2019 11: 08
      +1
      You definitely do not write to Murzilka’s website? No offense, but a lot of so ... strange thoughts that it is difficult to react somehow differently.
      Quote: V1er
      Well yes. But the defeat of an expensive tank, a combat unit at the time of the battle, where it could save lives, the death of a trained crew, possibly an experienced one, is this not a disadvantage and danger?

      Last year, it seems, 2 soldiers in the BMD drowned in the exercises. Military equipment has great potential, but the non-observance of some rules carries the death of fighters. 20-30 meters of the possible defeat of their own fighters, and in some conditions it is not just likely, but guaranteed, for example, in the city.
      The infantry comes with tanks in some situations to protect it from defeat. This is primarily intelligence, and then the definition of goals, the suppression or transfer of goals.
      Quote: V1er
      In addition, having lost a tank, the infantry remains naked, some BMP can leave and spray the "surviving" infantry with lead from a 30mm cannon.

      Where to leave, in a clean field from around the corner? What are you fantasizing about? In a city without tanks, they will scout in all directions. In the field, the equipment will be discovered ahead of time. Etc.
      Quote: V1er
      The tank could have hit this behu, surviving under the protection of KAZ.

      If something is struck by a fighter with anti-tank weapons or request support lying down.
      Quote: V1er
      For example, let tanks and infantry fighting vehicles with KAZ in front.

      What other bmp forward? There are means of defeat through KAZ, there are kinetic ammunition, there are small-caliber mass ammunition that do not give a damn about KAZ. There are land mines. Yes, there are many. Even their heavy armored armored vehicles tracked Israelis do not drive into battle.
      Quote: V1er
      Are Jews and Americans so stupid that they began to put these KAZ almost on motorcycles (exaggerate) ?.

      Of course exaggerate. Some types of KAZ can even be installed on light equipment, but this does not mean what is needed. For any technique there are tasks, in these tasks there is an adversary who will confront and defend the goals from him, and not from everything in the world or from something suddenly. Because troubles can happen much more.
      Quote: V1er
      Have a disconnected KAZ.

      This is not a problem at all. Where the tanks are not accompanied by infantry, they can be set up, turned on, anything. But all the same, these will be sources of increased danger to their own. And on BMD, this is an extremely controversial issue.
      1. V1er
        V1er 26 August 2019 15: 29
        +1
        Thanks for your reply, Andrey.
  4. andrewkor
    andrewkor 25 August 2019 07: 53
    0
    This masterpiece-BMP-3 was created in such agony, you will not envy!
    Well done, kurgan, sjudzhyul!
    On the site otvaga2004 I read: "How the BMP-3 was created", "How the BMP-3 was sold", the saga, and more!
    1. Grigory_45
      Grigory_45 25 August 2019 08: 50
      -2
      Quote: andrewkor
      BMP-3 was created in such agony, you will not envy!

      and BMP-2 was born very difficult
  5. Megamarcel
    Megamarcel 25 August 2019 08: 12
    0
    All these complexes and systems are being created and discussed from the moment the BMP3 was delivered to the troops. But in the army, for some reason, as the BMP3 was, even without reactive armor, it is. Although the Americans at least equipped many of their Bradleys with a speaker. How much does BMP3 upgrade cost to Dragoon modification? In any case, the new Kurganets car is better than the BMP3, which was created in the 80s of the 20th century. If only because it has a higher potential for modernization. It is necessary to equip BMP3 with modern explosive reactive armor and modern devices and gradually change to Kurganets as the resource is depleted, because this is the most rational approach. Hurray for the patriots?
    1. donavi49
      donavi49 25 August 2019 08: 49
      -1
      An important role here is played by the analysis of combat damage in real conflicts. Take for example Syria / Iraq - an RPG there for every 4-5 of Baha'is. And there are practically no damage or knockouts to RPG armored vehicles. Cases are single. Why spend on protection - which will not give anything?

      Here are the Toe / Bassoons / Cornets flying there and there in every battle. But from them, the proposal to increase security does not give any protection.

      Another common factor is undermining under the canvas, on the side of the road, or ramming a shahidmobile.

      Another common factor is the defeat of small arms (especially BMPkhs in Syria suffer) = that is, what kind of Toyota thread leaves gives allah a turn from ZPU / ZU-23 and leaves for the house back.
    2. Grigory_45
      Grigory_45 25 August 2019 08: 49
      -2
      Quote: MegaMarcel
      But in the army, for some reason, the BMP3 was even without dynamic protection.

      everything must be the will of the Moscow Region, as a customer and operator of machines. It orders machines in a specific specification.
      DZ for light armored vehicles we have developed. There will be a task for developing a version for BMP-3 - they will. The same is true for KAZ (either adaptation of the Arena or Afghanite is possible - in their present form, unfortunately, without modifications, they won’t get on the BMP-3)
      And one more reason is seen. This is an indispensable requirement of the Ministry of Defense - that the machine has the opportunity to swim by itself independently. If this requirement were not mandatory, there would be a mass reserve (both due to the removal of the water-jet propulsion and related systems, as well as the requirements for buoyancy), which can be used both to increase passive protection, as well as hinged DZ and KAZ installations
      1. Red_Baron
        Red_Baron 25 August 2019 15: 23
        +1
        Quote: Gregory_45
        There will be a task for developing a version for BMP-3 - they will.

        Yes, for a long time already.

        Quote: Gregory_45
        The same is true for KAZ (either adaptation of the Arena or Afghanite is possible - in their present form, unfortunately, without modifications, they won’t get on the BMP-3)

        Yes, there is the same. The BMP-3 with the Arena has long been demonstrated.
        Quote: Gregory_45
        If this requirement were not mandatory, there would be a mass reserve (both due to the removal of the water-jet propulsion and related systems, as well as the requirements for buoyancy), which can be used both to increase passive protection, as well as hinged DZ and KAZ installations

        Well, let there be several BMPs. Let's just say the line of light BMPs now in the form of BMP-3 and previous models. And a heavy infantry fighting vehicle like Kurganets or even T15.
        Quote: Gregory_45
        everything must be the will of the Moscow Region, as a customer and operator of machines. It orders machines in a specific specification.

        There must be a sense in some kind of alterations. The same Vorrior without DZ and KAZ is used. It has the ceramic armor of Chobham. As part of the Challengers reservation. Maybe it's worth taking this path. By the way, Israelis also use ceramic armor.
        1. Grigory_45
          Grigory_45 25 August 2019 15: 30
          -1
          Quote: Red_Baron
          Yes, for a long time already

          Quote: Red_Baron
          Yes, there is the same. BMP-3 with Arena has long been demonstrated

          Have you carefully read my comment? Reading yours, I can make an unambiguous conclusion that no.

          Quote: Red_Baron
          Well let there be some BMP

          yeah, three infantry fighting vehicles, 10 armored personnel carriers and 15 MBT. Gorgeous)) Logistics - well, fuck it, logistics ....

          Quote: Red_Baron
          There must be a sense in some kind of alterations

          the point, as I wrote above, is to adapt the system to the machine.
          Quote: Red_Baron
          The same Vorrior without DZ and KAZ is used. It has the ceramic armor of Chobham. Like the Challengers Reservation Part

          they have no KAZ. And on the Challengers DZ and gratings are hung, there are so-called "urban combat kits."
          1. Red_Baron
            Red_Baron 25 August 2019 15: 55
            0
            You know, I often communicate and already understand in advance with which contingent a dialogue happened by chance.
            Quote: Gregory_45
            Have you carefully read my comment? Reading yours, I can make an unambiguous conclusion that no.

            Quote: Gregory_45
            There will be a task for developing a version for BMP-3 - they will.

            You seem to forget what you write after 5 minutes. I understand, I understand, you are deciphering this phrase in a secret way and it begins to mean something completely different. I don’t have to lie. You have it clearly written. What if there is a task for developing a version of a remote sensing for BMP-3 it will be done. I answered you that it has long been developed.
            Quote: Gregory_45
            yeah, three infantry fighting vehicles, 10 armored personnel carriers and 15 MBT. Gorgeous)) Logistics - well, fuck it, logistics ....

            This is a continuation of the extravaganza. BMP now uses 4 main ones. Perhaps one more will be added. BTR in the near future will be about 3 pieces. MBT 5 pieces. And I understand if you were worried about maintenance, the supply of spare parts, the capabilities of repair crews and more. But here you have shown extravaganza.
            Quote: Gregory_45
            the point, as I wrote above, is to adapt the system to the machine.

            What adaptation, if the systems that I brought up above have already been tested on this particular machine? What other adaptation do you need?
            Not only that, what are you writing about? I write about the need to use these systems on some machines. You tell me about adaptation ...
            Quote: Gregory_45
            they have KAZ netute.

            Another feispalm. Americans, for example, use Israeli. what prevents if you want to use the same?
            Quote: Gregory_45
            And on the Challengers DZ and gratings are hung, there are so-called "urban combat kits."

            and again extravaganza. And then DZ and lattice on the Challenger? I know what they are using, and what do they do here? :))) I just wrote that Chobham, which is one of the elements of the Challenger reservation, is placed on the Warrior.
            Look, you forgot what you wrote 5 minutes ago. You wrote how many interesting and entertaining things from other areas that have nothing to do with my words. It seems that it’s very difficult for you to concentrate and you just write whatever comes to mind. I beg you not to.
            1. Grigory_45
              Grigory_45 25 August 2019 16: 10
              -2
              Quote: Red_Baron
              and again extravaganza

              and so with you in everything.

              On points, if it is difficult for you to understand what is written. Although, if you are building yourself a specialist, you should have understood perfectly.

              So

              Quote: Red_Baron
              I just wrote that Chobham, which is one of the elements of the Challenger reservation, is placed on the Warrior

              the fact is that multilayer armor is good, but does not help. The British have no KAZ. They tried to create it, but went their own exclusive way (using a machine gun as a means of defeating the attacking ammunition), and nothing good came of it. That’s why there are grilles on the machines, invoice armor and so on - in order to somehow increase the security of the machine. And not because their armor is so steep that it stops ATGMs. The presence of DZ on tanks is proof of this. Is it clear now?

              Quote: Red_Baron
              Americans, for example, use Israeli. what prevents if you want to use the same?

              The Americans have just begun testing Trophy in their cars. Until now, they also tried to pile their own, but to no avail.
              Why won't the British do the same? Ask them. Why do they have a rifled gun, and not a smoothbore? Why is the gun on Warrier not automatic, like everyone else? Why didn’t they have a two-pound HE shell in WWII? Why should I know what kind of cockroaches in their head?

              Quote: Red_Baron
              What adaptation, if the systems that I brought up above have already been tested on this particular machine? What other adaptation do you need?

              Tested. But a little in the wrong configuration. And how much water has flowed since then?
              As for Cactus, that is, more advanced versions of DZ, they should be approved. The same applies to the Arena - the option that was on the BMP-3 is not the most successful. A more successful option for the T-72, but it will need to be finalized for the BMP. The same is with Afnanitom from Kurganets.
              The point is that there is no ready-made kit for the BMP-3. There are existing systems, but in order to hang them on the top three, it is necessary to conduct OCD. This is what my words meant.
              Quote: Gregory_45
              the point, as I wrote above, is to adapt the system to the machine


              Therefore, my pirouettes like
              Quote: Red_Baron
              It seems that it’s very difficult for you to concentrate and you just write whatever comes to mind

              either keep it with you, or take it to your account
              hi
              1. Red_Baron
                Red_Baron 25 August 2019 16: 28
                0
                Quote: Gregory_45
                and so with you in everything.

                Moved the arrows ... I see :)
                Quote: Gregory_45
                On points, if it is difficult for you to understand what is written. Although, if you are building yourself a specialist, you should have understood perfectly.

                I perfectly understood that the phrase is unambiguous. You know what is funny, even now for the second time mentioning your post you could not explain your words. And just meaningfully again hinted at something. This is a completely normal method of walking around the bush, because if you speak essentially, you have to admit that you are wrong, and this, apparently, is too complicated.
                Quote: Gregory_45
                the fact is that multilayer armor is good, but does not help.

                Once again - where does it come from? I do not want to discuss the quality and capabilities of the Ceramic British armor. I just mentioned that they use it.
                Quote: Gregory_45
                And not because their armor is so steep that it stops ATGMs. The presence of DZ on tanks is proof of this. Is it clear now?

                No :) No one said that their armor stops ATGMs. :) Why did you start proving this?
                Quote: Gregory_45
                The Americans have just begun testing Trophy in their cars. Until now, they also tried to pile their own, but to no avail.

                What? :) Already in the 18th year, re-equipped units use tanks with KAZ Trophy. after some other part of the tanks Trophy was equipped.
                Why did you write that the Americans were trying to create their own KAZ? is it that everyone who is interested in KAZ knows Do you have verbal incontinence? For one phrase on the topic to write on top off topic? Do you think this should show your knowledge, not strangeness? I assure you this is not so.
                Quote: Gregory_45
                Why should I know what kind of cockroaches in their head?

                And that was actually a rhetorical question. In context, this is understandable. These words meant - there would be a desire, but there are opportunities.
                Quote: Gregory_45
                Tested. But a little in the wrong configuration. And how much water has flowed since then?

                What is the difference how much water, the features of the installation and work have been tested, but nothing else is needed. The technique has not changed since that time, and what to expect from it is clear.
                Quote: Gregory_45
                As for Cactus, that is, more advanced versions of DZ, they should be approved.

                So Cactus has interchangeable elements. They can be replaced with any other.
                Quote: Gregory_45
                either keep it with you, or take it to your account

                And in my account, why? If I have any complaints about your words, I honestly expressed them.
                1. Grigory_45
                  Grigory_45 25 August 2019 16: 41
                  -4
                  Quote: Red_Baron
                  Do you have verbal incontinence?

                  I come to the same conclusion. And, like any nearby troll, right away, from the first comment, the transition to personalities began. But we are not paying attention to this, what else to expect from you?
                  Quote: Red_Baron
                  Quote: Gregory_45
                  the fact is that multilayer armor is good, but does not help.

                  Once again - where does it come from? I do not want to discuss the quality and capabilities of the Ceramic British armor. I just mentioned that they use it.

                  Yes, despite the fact that they began to complain - over there, they say, the British are smart, they don’t use KAZ, maybe we shouldn’t? We’ll manage, say, with ceramics. You were told why they are not using, and why it is worth putting KAZ and DZ.
                  But, I feel, it won’t reach again.

                  Quote: Red_Baron
                  What is the difference how much water, the features of the installation and work have been tested, but nothing else is needed. The technique has not changed since that time, and what to expect from it is clear.

                  for those in the tank:
                  Quote: Gregory_45
                  As for Cactus, that is, more advanced versions of DZ, they should be approved. The same applies to the Arena - the option that was on the BMP-3 is not the most successful. A more successful option for the T-72, but it will need to be finalized for the BMP. The same is with Afnanitom from Kurganets.
                  The point is that there is no ready-made kit for the BMP-3. There are existing systems, but to hang them in the top three, need to conduct OCD.


                  Quote: Red_Baron
                  Already in 18, re-equipped units use tanks with KAZ Trophy

                  in October 2017, only a contract was concluded to equip the tanks of their combatant armored units with active defense systems (KAZ)
                  And only a few months ago, cars came to Europe. This is called recently.

                  Quote: Red_Baron
                  If I have any complaints about your words, I honestly expressed them.

                  and I honestly expressed them, in your own words. I can add that it’s also a demagogue. Satisfied with the level of honesty?
                  1. Red_Baron
                    Red_Baron 25 August 2019 18: 57
                    -1
                    I’m saying that from the very beginning I understood who I’m dealing with. when you began to distort words like a child, when you began to tell fairy tales as if your phrase means something other than written. Well, verbal incontinence and jumping from topic to topic.
                    Quote: Gregory_45
                    Yes, despite the fact that they began to complain - over there, they say, the British are smart, they don’t use KAZ, maybe we shouldn’t?

                    Can I even quote here where I complained about this? or is it chatter again?
                    I pointed out that kaz and dz is not something obligatory and not everyone uses it. But you, again, have composed something to my words.
                    Quote: Gregory_45
                    You were told why they are not using, and why it is worth putting KAZ and DZ.
                    But, I feel, it won’t reach again.

                    Yes, even without you I know why they use it, you repeated the words from the wiki, under the guise of a revelation. incontinence again. And give KAZ to you.

                    Quote: Gregory_45
                    And only a few months ago, cars came to Europe. This is called recently.

                    Quote: Gregory_45
                    The Americans have just begun testing Trophy in their cars.

                    Well, you see, it’s not long ago, not just that. At least we have cured you of something.
                    1. Grigory_45
                      Grigory_45 25 August 2019 20: 30
                      -2
                      Quote: Red_Baron
                      from the very beginning I understood who I’m dealing with

                      I also understood from the very beginning with whom I am dealing - with an inadequate amateur who considers himself a specialist) It's funny))

                      Quote: Red_Baron
                      Can I even quote here where I complained about this?

                      yes please) Dipping you into yours is a pleasure
                      Quote: Red_Baron
                      There must be a sense in some kind of alterations. The same Vorrior without DZ and KAZ is used. It has the ceramic armor of Chobham. As part of the Challengers reservation. Maybe it's worth taking this path.

                      Ate?

                      Quote: Red_Baron
                      you repeated the words from the wiki under the guise of revelation

                      Quote: Red_Baron
                      incontinence again

                      Do not judge by yourself. I’m right and see how you write comments, looking in the mirror))
                      1. Red_Baron
                        Red_Baron 25 August 2019 21: 51
                        -1
                        Quote: Gregory_45
                        I also understood from the very beginning with whom I am dealing - with an inadequate amateur who considers himself a specialist) It's funny))

                        It's funny to hear from you the word understood. For several hours of your delirium, you could not answer for your very first phrase. Although I repeatedly reminded of her. So this is all the next chatter from you.
                        Quote: Gregory_45
                        yes please) Dipping you into yours is a pleasure

                        where did you get out of?
                        Quote: Gregory_45
                        Ate?

                        Well, this is your next dumbness. It would be better if I didn’t get out of there where I wanted to dunk others. I couldn’t even show a quote about which I spoke, so swim further in your favorite substances. Great place for you. In the quote of my words, there is NOT A single word that KAZ should not be used. There are words about ceramic armor as part of a reservation. Here, too, you showed complete drying up of the brain, and the ambition was ... getting wet. in the end, I just went a little under myself. But again, this is normal for you.
                        Quote: Gregory_45
                        Do not judge by yourself. I’m right and see how you write comments, looking in the mirror))

                        All your destiny is to translate arrows like a schoolboy, in fact, the rest of what was written is not far from the school mind has gone. You can't even read what is written normally, and when you write nonsense yourself, you immediately start to get out. Quickly grab the primer - "to read to learn - always come in handy." :)
        2. Grigory_45
          Grigory_45 25 August 2019 15: 32
          -2
          Quote: Red_Baron
          The same Vorrior without DZ and KAZ

          and that's what they’re doing. This is the British))
          1. Red_Baron
            Red_Baron 25 August 2019 15: 56
            -1
            Do you see the photo? This performance in the circus, I like the photo published in the article about the warrior.
            But in some wars, operations, and other things, the Vorriors participated in such vestments?
            1. Grigory_45
              Grigory_45 25 August 2019 16: 30
              -2
              Quote: Red_Baron
              But in some wars, operations, and other things, the Vorriors participated in such vestments?

              Iraq


              in a similar body kit cars are used in Afghanistan
              1. Red_Baron
                Red_Baron 25 August 2019 16: 34
                -1
                Well, see for yourself in the photo - this is not the same armor on the machines that you showed earlier.
                Now in the photo is the usual Chobham and the grill.
    3. Red_Baron
      Red_Baron 25 August 2019 15: 16
      -1
      Nonsense again.
      Quote: MegaMarcel
      But in the army, for some reason, the BMP3 was even without dynamic protection.

      If you equip BMP3 DZ, then anyway in the army, it will most often be without it. Why carry it all the time. Even in the west, some of the protection elements were removed under normal conditions.
      An article about the British Warrior was not long ago, so he does not have dynamic protection. Imagine - not a couple of us sivolapym, the British themselves.
      Quote: MegaMarcel
      Although the Americans at least equipped many of their Bradley dynamics.

      Well, for example, because they are actively attacking ATGM tanks. BMP3 has no such task.
      Quote: MegaMarcel
      What is the cost of upgrading the BMP3 before the modification of the Dragoons?

      And why did you decide that BMP3 should be in the modification of Dragoons specifically?
      Quote: MegaMarcel
      In any case, the new Kurganets car is better than the BMP3, which was created in the 80s of the 20th century. If only because it has a higher potential for modernization.

      What nonsense. Completely different cars with different capabilities.
      Quote: MegaMarcel
      It is necessary to equip BMP3 with modern explosive reactive armor and modern devices and gradually change to Kurganets as the resource is depleted, because this is the most rational approach. Hurray for the patriots?

      Of course not. There must be both cars. One is cheaper, easier for its tasks, the other heavy and better protected for its own.
      And where are the patriots? just remember how your opposite?
      1. Grigory_45
        Grigory_45 25 August 2019 17: 05
        -3
        Quote: Red_Baron
        Quote: MegaMarcel
        Although the Americans at least equipped many of their Bradley dynamics.

        Well, for example, because they are actively attacking ATGM tanks

        Goshpody, what does it have to do with it? DZs on infantry fighting vehicles are placed not for protection against BOPS defeat, but for protection against cumulative - now infantry orders are saturated with various PTSs, from ancient RPG-7 to ATGM. They represent the danger, not the tanks.

        Quote: Red_Baron
        Quote: MegaMarcel
        In any case, the new Kurganets car is better than the BMP3, which was created in the 80s of the 20th century. If only because it has a higher potential for modernization.

        What nonsense. Completely different cars with different capabilities

        what is the nonsense? Machines have the same purpose, are designed to perform the same functions.

        Quote: Red_Baron
        Must be both cars

        this is just nonsense. If it comes to the B-11 (Kurganets) and BMP-3. If you need a heavy and light infantry fighting vehicle, then it should be T-15 and B-11. Another thing is that this will not happen
        1. Red_Baron
          Red_Baron 25 August 2019 19: 06
          -1
          Quote: Gregory_45
          Goshpody, what does it have to do with it? DZs on infantry fighting vehicles are placed not for protection against BOPS defeat, but for protection against cumulative - now infantry orders are saturated with various PTSs, from ancient RPG-7 to ATGM. They represent the danger, not the tanks.

          I’ll tell you a secret, tank shots are also cumulative.
          Quote: Gregory_45
          what is the nonsense? Machines have the same purpose, are designed to perform the same functions.

          the nonsense is that these are completely different cars with different capabilities. But I think it’s hard for you to understand.
          Quote: Gregory_45
          this is just nonsense. If it comes to the B-11 (Kurganets) and BMP-3. If you need a heavy and light infantry fighting vehicle, then it should be T-15 and B-11. Another thing is that this will not happen

          Well, what you need at home you will decide. By the way, they do not say "for", they say "about" we are not in the village.
          1. Grigory_45
            Grigory_45 25 August 2019 20: 24
            -2
            Quote: Red_Baron
            I’ll tell you a secret, tank shots are also cumulative

            I’ll tell you a secret - I know that very well))
            Those. You confirm that the main task of remote sensing on light armored vehicles is to protect against cumulative ammunition. In this case, it wasn’t even worth arguing with my comment, because the chance to get a COP from a tank is negligible in relation to getting a guarantor from an RPG or ATGM from an ATGM.

            Quote: Red_Baron
            these are completely different cars with different capabilities.

            I repeat - these machines are of one purpose. But you really
            Quote: Red_Baron
            it will be hard to understand.


            I do not comment on the rest, for the statements of the demagogue and the grumbling old man
            1. Red_Baron
              Red_Baron 25 August 2019 21: 44
              -1
              Quote: Gregory_45
              Those. You confirm that the main task of remote sensing on light armored vehicles is to protect against cumulative ammunition.

              That is, if I said something about cumulative ammunition anyway, it should be considered anyway that I think as you want. Do not continue to compose for me. You and then do not really compose.
              Quote: Gregory_45
              I’ll tell you a secret - I know that very well))

              Well, at least in some ways, I opened my eyes :)))
              Quote: Gregory_45
              I repeat - these machines are of one purpose. But you really

              Again, these are different cars with different capabilities.
              Quote: Gregory_45
              I do not comment on the rest, for the statements of the demagogue and the grumbling old man

              And before that it was not commenting, but a sea of ​​water and statements out of place.
              1. Grigory_45
                Grigory_45 25 August 2019 21: 53
                -3
                Quote: Red_Baron
                Don't keep composing for me

                which I advise you. From your first comment.

                Sorry, but you personify the saying: "don't touch g ... it doesn't stink"
                You have one goal - not to conduct a constructive discussion (in which interesting ideas are sometimes born), but to show your "exceptional rightness". Although not right. Such individuals are simply disgusting. If your EGO allows, do not write to me anymore. I realized that you are a terry dilettante. Not interesting.
                I could fill you up to the fullest, but it’s not interesting for me. I have other goals of staying on this resource, and not of satisfying my own private security, like yours.
                1. Red_Baron
                  Red_Baron 25 August 2019 22: 00
                  -1
                  You have a very bloated FWM, so much so that you are forced instead of arguments to constantly slide into chatter and dullness. This became clear from the first post where you wrote about fitting armor for the BMP-3, which is already there. But there was neither the courage nor the mind to admit his mistake. You continued to shoot arrows and justify yourself in every way as a child. You fill up everything that you could, I have not seen such a shame and such delusional reasoning for a long time. so much water off topic and re-twisting other people's phrases. This is similar to the fuss of a little stupid absurdity who, with a happy smile, runs like dipping his opponent, and rubs his hands, but in reality he is more and more stupid and dishonoring himself. All this speaks of problems in the head, inadequate perception of reality and a bunch of complexes. All this looks pathetic and disgusting, as if another old whiner is beginning to claw as he is now reorganizing something that he already forgot. You need to be treated, better with electricity, and more to read and listen than to chat. So at least you will not look like a miserable chatterbox.
                  1. Grigory_45
                    Grigory_45 25 August 2019 22: 25
                    -2
                    Quote: Red_Baron
                    You need to be treated

                    be treated. do not tighten)
                    Quote: Red_Baron
                    better by electricity

                    Take the advice. I recommend 10 kV
  6. lucul
    lucul 25 August 2019 09: 03
    +2
    BMP-3 will receive protection from shells and missiles

    Yeah, and also can withstand a hit from the Death Star.
    Upgrade all BMP-3 to the level of Dragoons. All BMP 1/2 to sell or for scrap.
    1. Red_Baron
      Red_Baron 25 August 2019 15: 26
      -3
      Well, let's refute if you do not think so.
      Quote: lucul
      Upgrade all BMP-3 to the level of Dragoons. All BMP 1/2 to sell or for scrap.

      Let’s do something for us already?
    2. Grigory_45
      Grigory_45 25 August 2019 17: 07
      -2
      Quote: lucul
      Already upgrade all BMP-3 to Dragoon level

      But what, Dragoon has better protection than BMP-3 with invoice armor and KAZ?
      By the way, Dragoon has a motor in front. Did you have to sacrifice the thickness of the frontal armor to maintain weight distribution?
      1. lucul
        lucul 25 August 2019 18: 14
        0
        But what, Dragoon has better protection than BMP-3 with invoice armor and KAZ?

        The same, only the landing compartment in Dragoon is much better ...
        1. Grigory_45
          Grigory_45 25 August 2019 21: 57
          -1
          Quote: lucul
          The same

          justify

          Quote: lucul
          only the landing compartment in Dragoon is much better

          no not better. In the bottom, the lower part of the combat module protrudes, greatly restricting the landing. In my opinion, this is more spacious in the BMP-3 (I have been in the BMP-2, and BMP-3, and BMD-4, and in Dragoon)
  7. Nikolaevich I
    Nikolaevich I 25 August 2019 09: 08
    +3
    By the way, the Arena KAZ system was somehow tested on the BMP-3 ... and by the way, the tests were carried out in combat conditions in Chechnya, if you believe the author of the article, which described this. If you "choose", any "KAZ, then it may well be a complex created on the basis of the KAZ" Arena "... I do not" offer "" Arena "in a" pure "form; because from the moment "the appearance of this complex has passed a lot of time and during this time new ideas have appeared ... The" Arena "system attracts, first of all, the" flat "construction of the" counter-ammunition ", which allows the formation of a directed fragmentation or" multi-nuclear ", wide-profile beam "... On the" base "of such ammunition, a" new "should be created ...
    This "counter-ammunition" assumes the following: 1. stock "pusher" instead of the propelling squib; 2. stabilizer of the ammunition on the flight path; 3. correction of the position of the ammunition in space; 4. angular roll sensors; 5. radio or laser receiver command to detonate ammunition. Along with a fragmentation or "multinuclear" panel, the "counter-ammunition" can be equipped with a "monolithic" drop-off panel in order to affect the cores of the BOPS and reduce the danger to the infantry. "Control ammunition" can be fired both to the sides in a horizontal or inclined plane, and upward in a vertical plane. It depends on the direction of the "combat vector" of the launcher and the design of the launcher ...
    1. Grigory_45
      Grigory_45 27 August 2019 19: 40
      +1
      Quote: Nikolaevich I
      By the way, the Arena KAZ system was somehow tested on the BMP-3 ...

      it was so. Nice complex)

      Quote: Nikolaevich I
      tests were conducted in combat in Chechnya, according to the author of the article

      honestly, I haven’t heard of this. Although, it seems, I know almost everything about the BMP-3 ...

      Quote: Nikolaevich I
      I do not "offer" "Arena" in a "pure" form; a lot of time has passed since the "moment" of the appearance of this complex, and during this time new ideas have appeared.

      Mouth) as he tried to convey to some not very understanding. Take either Arena or Afghanit as a basis, and adapt the complex to the car. This, of course, will require OCD, but short-lived and uncomplicated. The output is a fully functional system that can protect against grenades and ATGMs

      Quote: Nikolaevich I
      Along with a fragmentation or "multinuclear" panel, the "counter-ammunition" can be equipped with a "monolithic" drop-off panel in order to affect the cores of the BOPS

      in my opinion, this is already unnecessary. The probability of a direct collision between an infantry fighting vehicle and a tank is negligible. Is it worth it to significantly complicate and increase the cost of the complex? After all, its main function is to protect infantry from anti-tank weapons, i.e. RPGs and ATGMs
      1. Nikolaevich I
        Nikolaevich I 28 August 2019 01: 45
        0
        Quote: Gregory_45
        honestly, I haven’t heard of this

        Yes, I had to read such an article ... I'm not sure that I will find it in my "archive", because. some time ago, a significant part of the information "disappeared" on my computer ...
        Quote: Gregory_45
        Take either Arena or Afghanit as a basis, and adapt the complex to the car.

        Thank you for your understanding and support for the "idea"! hi
        Quote: Gregory_45
        in my opinion, this is already unnecessary

        Duc, I "offer" different options to the "buyer" just in case, and he - "chooses"! wink
  8. Narak-zempo
    Narak-zempo 25 August 2019 09: 19
    -2
    Here it is written about the defeat of its own infantry when the KAZ fires. And what about the radar, which, unlike the striking means, will work in battle constantly? Such a huge microwave on the roof, probably capable of causing serious burns.
    1. Sarduor
      Sarduor 25 August 2019 09: 31
      +5
      This is not a microwave radar, and the power is not enough to cause burns. Maximum head will hurt and then after hours of operation.
      1. Narak-zempo
        Narak-zempo 25 August 2019 09: 37
        +1
        Quote: Sarduor
        This is not a microwave radar.

        And what else can be the radar for detecting and accurately tracking small-sized high-speed objects?
        1. Sarduor
          Sarduor 25 August 2019 09: 47
          +2
          Millimeter.
          1. venik
            venik 25 August 2019 11: 46
            -1
            Quote: Sarduor
            Millimeter.

            =======
            Or rather - centimeter!
    2. Grigory_45
      Grigory_45 27 August 2019 19: 44
      0
      Quote: Narak-zempo
      And what about the radar, which, unlike the striking means, will work in battle constantly?

      shrapnel defeat is unlikely
      Quote: Narak-zempo
      Such a huge microwave

      Radar power is small. Its range is only about a hundred meters. KAZ’s radar requires very high accuracy, not range (otherwise the complex’s computers will go crazy with calculating the trajectories of a plane flying above the battlefield)
      1. Narak-zempo
        Narak-zempo 27 August 2019 23: 02
        0
        Quote: Gregory_45
        shrapnel defeat is unlikely

        Yes, I'm not talking about the defeat of the radar, but about how the work of the radar will affect the people around the car.
        The microwave power is also relatively small, but if its magnetron is directed at a person, it will not seem enough.
      2. Narak-zempo
        Narak-zempo 27 August 2019 23: 08
        0
        Quote: Gregory_45
        otherwise the computer of the complex will go crazy from calculating the trajectories of a plane flying above the battlefield

        It should detect something at a great distance, especially BOPS. As for the overloading of the computational module, I think you can teach it not to see, for example, objects with a significant angular velocity relative to the machine, that is, obviously flying by.
        1. Grigory_45
          Grigory_45 28 August 2019 09: 16
          0
          Quote: Narak-zempo
          It must be detected at a great distance

          not necessary. The speed of all systems of the complex is much more important in order to manage to respond to the threat.
          Detection range of approaching targets of the KAZ Arena radar, for example - 50 meters

          Quote: Narak-zempo
          As for overloading the computational module, I think you can teach it not to see, for example, objects with significant angular velocity relative to the machine, i.e., obviously flying past

          in order to determine whether the ammunition is threatening or not, it is necessary to determine its speed (suddenly it is stones raised by a close gap or a hand grenade), EPR (the size of the object is suddenly a small-caliber projectile) and at least approximately calculate its trajectory. All this is computing power. Naturally, ammunition that does not threaten the vehicle is not taken for escort and their further trajectory is not monitored. But with the increase in the volume of the scanned space, the load on the computer grows exponentially. Therefore, the detection range of the KAZ radar is small, and since the range is small, then there is no need and high power
  9. Zaurbek
    Zaurbek 25 August 2019 10: 05
    +2
    Without KAZ, the immediate conflict will bring us huge losses in armored vehicles and people. 2nd generation PTRK went to the masses and is already with everyone.
  10. Izotovp
    Izotovp 25 August 2019 10: 38
    0
    The derivation should be deprived of the landing and in the place of the landing to establish a compartment with missiles for various purposes with a vertical launch. And act in conjunction with the Shell.
  11. venik
    venik 25 August 2019 11: 05
    +2
    "....At the same time, the motor-transmission compartment was moved to the front of the machine, which increases the security of the paratroopers and crew. In fact, it was only in Dragoon that Russian designers turned to the layout classic for BMPs of other countries. ..... "
    =======
    What nonsense, Sergey Yuferev! fool Classic FOR FOREIGNERS ???? And what is interesting in your layout BMP-1, the first in the world (and its further development of BMP-2) ??? BMP-3 is just the only one in the Soviet and Russian Army BMP, having a layout similar to combat vehicles landing - with engine in the stern !!! Exactly!!!
  12. garri-lin
    garri-lin 25 August 2019 12: 25
    +1
    In conversations about the KAZ, the defeat of infantry infantry by striking elements by the KAZ male is often mentioned, but it is extremely rare to mention the probability of a soldier being struck by fragments of intercepted enemy ammunition. I think the damage to the infantry from undermining the ATGM that did not reach the tank will be much greater. Dannyts is rarely discussed. I think the infantry simply should be absent from the directions from which shelling is possible. At least close to technology.
    1. Red_Baron
      Red_Baron 25 August 2019 15: 32
      0
      I think that when talking about KAZ they mean not only the striking elements of KAZ, but rather the effect of its action. Where, of course, fragments of intercepted ammunition also enter. But I think. correctly recalled.
      1. garri-lin
        garri-lin 25 August 2019 15: 42
        +1
        In conversations about Trophy, Jews often emphasize that the striking elements (nuclei) fly only in the ammunition itself. The high-explosive action and the striking elements flying in other directions are almost absent, thereby reducing the likelihood of defeating their own infantry. Good, true approach. Yes, and intercepted ammunition sometimes does not explode but is destroyed.
        1. Red_Baron
          Red_Baron 25 August 2019 16: 02
          0
          [media=https://rutube.ru/video/85f55ef7f38a8bead74eaf4c6c7ab812/]
          Look at the shot down RPG-9
          there it is clearly visible that the grenade is struck by several elements that fly not at the target, but at the side of the target.
          1. garri-lin
            garri-lin 25 August 2019 17: 53
            0
            Unfortunately the video did not open. But the essence of this does not change. Infantry should be absent in sectors from which shelling is possible to avoid terrible compromises.
            1. Red_Baron
              Red_Baron 25 August 2019 19: 16
              0
              Quote: garri-lin
              Infantry should be absent in sectors from which shelling is possible to avoid terrible compromises.

              Yes
  13. Strashila
    Strashila 25 August 2019 12: 35
    0
    According to the modernization, it is necessary to make a decision, it is one thing if the machine retains the properties of independently forcing water barriers, this will be one option. If you do a purely land, then another is possible. As a result, the designers will be considered sitting down, they will make a verdict, this is Moguem, and this is not for nothing, there is no margin for engine power or suspension and cross-country ability, here it is necessary technically to make a new project based on new requirements for the realities of life.
    1. prodi
      prodi 25 August 2019 14: 10
      0
      with floating equipment, it is first necessary to theoretically solve the dilemma: on the one hand, the tracked vehicle is better adapted to increased weight and more logical to make it more secure to the detriment of buoyancy; on the other, getting out of the water onto the shore to a wheeled vehicle is much harder. In fact, MO continues to stand raskoryachim
      1. Red_Baron
        Red_Baron 25 August 2019 15: 34
        0
        Or use multiple cars.
        1. prodi
          prodi 25 August 2019 16: 06
          0
          Yes, even if they first decide - is it really possible in practice to maintain the rarely used buoyancy of almost all light armored vehicles, or is it better to keep such equipment in reserve?
          1. Red_Baron
            Red_Baron 25 August 2019 16: 14
            -1
            Quote: prodi
            Yes, even if they first decide - is it really possible in practice to maintain the rarely used buoyancy of almost all light armored vehicles, or is it better to keep such equipment in reserve?

            A few months ago, we corresponded with a man who described in detail the maneuverability of floating equipment. And I tend to agree with him.
            And THEY have already decided everything. For this reason, exercises are being conducted, including with the forcing of water barriers.
            1. prodi
              prodi 25 August 2019 16: 48
              -1
              well, you still, do not equate planned exercises and the "clumsy turnover" of practical combat use, especially long-term
            2. Corn
              Corn 25 August 2019 17: 52
              0
              God forbid, 1 percent of the state-owned equipment is involved in such “exercises”; for all other exercises, at best, they consist of starting the engine and the circle around the boxes.
      2. Corn
        Corn 25 August 2019 17: 49
        -1
        on the third hand, no one knows why the heck generally need buoyancy of combined arms technology. Okay, still landing, okay reconnaissance, but why do motorized rifles of varying degrees of elite (the main core of any continental army) need castrated equipment, which is still not designed to operate in isolation from the main forces ?!
        This question is regularly raised as the rooster pecks in Kfgan, Chechnya or Georgia, and things are still there ...
        1. prodi
          prodi 25 August 2019 18: 07
          -1
          Well, yes, it’s as if to convey to them that buoyancy ALWAYS comes at the expense of security.
          At least, I have never seen any additional armor panels (on board or on the roof), raised, if necessary, around an improvised deck, in order to add a couple of cubic meters of displacement and cover with bulletproof armor the landing troops sitting at the top (well, not inside they soar in really!)
        2. Disant
          Disant 26 August 2019 17: 41
          0
          Karl, Afghanistan, Chechnya and Georgia - this is not our war. Our war, which we always prepare for, if you didn’t know - thermonuclear, for extermination: 10 minutes - the crew covered the car with a barrel of solid oil, threw a couple of barrels of diesel fuel on suspensions, checked the filter-ventilation unit and drove, without dismantling the roads, through rivers, mountains and fields.
          Therefore, everything should be floating and on the caterpillar.
    2. Red_Baron
      Red_Baron 25 August 2019 15: 33
      0
      It is possible to simply use several options. From a design point of view, as I understand it, there are no obstacles. Machines were tested with all possible performance options, there is a new, very powerful engine.
  14. kunstkammer
    kunstkammer 25 August 2019 15: 04
    0
    Quote: svp67
    BPM-1 and Kurganets-25 models in one scale

    So what? And if on the BMP-1 hang the same protection as on Kurganets and put mine protection on the bottom? I think that the BMP-box will grow in my eyes fellow to the extent of Kurgan.
    I believe that the landing party and the crew will only say thank you.
    1. svp67
      svp67 25 August 2019 15: 08
      0
      Quote: kunstkammer
      And if on the BMP-1 hang the same protection as on Kurganets and put mine protection on the bottom? I think that the BMP-scale in its eyes will grow to the scale of the Kurgan.

      The Czechs have such an interesting modernization project for our BMP-1,2

      And to be honest, I would not mind if we would create something like that on our base, both for our army and for export
      1. Red_Baron
        Red_Baron 25 August 2019 16: 11
        0
        As I understand it, the Jackal uses a new tower and the hull is redone. This is from the main, and although it strengthened its power, but the processing is substantial and more expensive than the changes. It seems to me that doing something for export, something like that will be too expensive for the customer. Now there are a lot of our old ones, there are Polish with minimal alterations, there are Ukrainian and there are many Chinese. I mean the ready-made used shnyh, which will cost much cheaper. And what gives the Jackal a fundamentally new? Remote Booking? This is not a problem for modernization. The tower at first glance is not bad. Again, as I understand it, patency is deteriorated due to the increase in mass of the screens.
        It seems to me that I always cautiously declare that it’s better to make a mounted upgrade, much cheaper.
        1. svp67
          svp67 25 August 2019 16: 45
          0
          Quote: Red_Baron
          As I understand it, the Jackal uses a new tower and the hull is redone.

          Not quite a tower, but a combat module ... We now have plenty of them

          Yes, of course, the hull has undergone changes, it has been increased in height by redoing the roof and part of the side, but made it more secure and convenient for fighting and transporting infantry.
          Quote: Red_Baron
          And what gives the Jackal a fundamentally new?

          Tanks are located differently, explosion-proof landing, ease of exit and entry.
          Quote: Red_Baron
          Again, as I understand it, patency is deteriorated due to the increase in mass of the screens.

          A more powerful engine is installed there, good and there is more space, we have a UTD-29, I think that it will go there normally
      2. Grigory_45
        Grigory_45 25 August 2019 17: 16
        -1
        Quote: svp67
        And to be honest, I would not mind if we would create something like that on our base, both for our army and for export

        And you think how much such an upgrade costs? There is not so much left of the "native" car - rollers and goslings)). Isn't it more efficient to build a new car right away?
        Despite the fact that even a modernized "deuce" of the type of "Jackal" does not reach the level - at least the same "three"
        1. svp67
          svp67 25 August 2019 17: 20
          0
          Quote: Gregory_45
          There is not so much left of the "native" car - rollers and goslings))

          It seems because of the spaced armor on the side. It is not clear that the roof of the old model has been cut off, which is not difficult, the side is partially welded on, so there is a lot from the "old woman" BMP
          Quote: Gregory_45
          Despite the fact that even a modernized "deuce" of the type of "Jackal" does not reach the level - at least the same "three"

          In what plan does not reach? Please specify.
          1. Grigory_45
            Grigory_45 25 August 2019 20: 16
            -1
            Quote: svp67
            partially welded board, so there are many

            no, there almost the whole building is new. From the old car - only the bottom and NLD. In addition, the layout of the machine has been radically revised (both in the BOT and in the control and combat department). Plus - throw away the old and put in a new engine, remove the BO and put the remotely controlled BM, change the communication means, install new devices ... Reportedly developers themselves
            promising BMP "Jackal" took over from BMP-1 and BMP-2 only some elements of the chassis and 30-mm automatic gun. All other machine components are either completely new developments, or are heavily redesigned elements of the basic technology.

            That is why such modernization - or, more correctly, the restructuring of the machine (if we draw an analogy, then the same thing as creating Vikramaditya from Gorshkov) cannot be cheap and can be done on the knee.

            What is inferior to BMP-3? At a comparable price - a lower level of armor and weapons. In my opinion, the Jackal is not so much a combat vehicle as a demonstrator of technology and capabilities - they say we can too.
            The car was introduced in 2013. Were there any customers? as far as I know - was not.
            1. svp67
              svp67 25 August 2019 20: 38
              -1
              Quote: Gregory_45
              According to the developers themselves,

              But also according to their reports, 65% of the old machine was saved in this machine.
              Quote: Gregory_45
              At a comparable price - a lower level of armor and weapons.

              It’s clear with the weapons, but I don’t agree with the armor protection plan. A greater angle of inclination of the VLD, the engine in the nose, here everything can be a turn
              Quote: Gregory_45
              In my opinion, the Jackal is not so much a combat vehicle as a demonstrator of technology and capabilities - they say we can too.

              I agree. But still, the machine is interesting. I would like for us to have such companies capable of making such demonstrators. One Kurganmashzavod obviously does not drag out the process of re-equipping troops
              1. Grigory_45
                Grigory_45 25 August 2019 20: 52
                -2
                Quote: svp67
                in terms of armor, I do not agree. A greater angle of inclination of the VLD, the engine in the nose, here everything can be a turn

                no, he can not. For one simple reason - for the same reason why a merkava cannot have armor protection comparable to tanks of a classic layout in the nose. The engine and transmission are heavier than armor. But at the same time they are not protection, for a structure made of aluminum and cast iron punched with crowbar or kumstroy, filled with solarium and oil - well, this is not protection ... The fact that the power block in the nose serves as protection is a myth.
                BMP-3 has in its nose a solid sandwich of spaced aluminum and steel armor. And a large angle of inclination of the VLD - only in the hope of a rebound. That with cumulative ammunition does not give much hope. From the rifleman - yes, there is a chance to be.

                Quote: svp67
                But still an interesting machine

                interesting, who argues that? I’m just talking about the advisability of such an upgrade from old cars ...

                Quote: svp67
                One Kurganmash plant obviously does not pull

                So KMZ is the only company in Russia producing light tracked armored vehicles. VGTZ does not count, there, according to my information, there is still a mess. However, as at the Mashzavod itself
                1. svp67
                  svp67 25 August 2019 21: 18
                  -2
                  Quote: Gregory_45
                  And a large angle of inclination of the VLD - only in the hope of a rebound. That with cumulative ammunition does not give much hope.

                  No, thank God is not a myth. Go to rebound, especially RPG grenades
                  Quote: Gregory_45
                  I’m just talking about the advisability of such an upgrade from old cars ...

                  It could be carried out on any former BTRZ, suitably equipped.
                  1. Grigory_45
                    Grigory_45 25 August 2019 22: 12
                    -1
                    Quote: svp67
                    Go to rebound, especially RPG grenades

                    the whole point is not in the very angle of inclination of the VLD (or any other armored obstacle), but in the angle of the meeting of the ammunition with it. The case, of the year, the grenade launcher will run out in front of the machine and fire a shot - it is negligible. They are fired from RPGs from positions that exceed the vehicle (from the upper floors, the prevailing heights, the roofs of houses - and then it is almost at a right angle), or from a position with belittling - and then falling either into the side projection or in the NLD. Ricochet from VLD - possible in case of shelling from something aggressively shooting, from a machine gun or cannon

                    Quote: svp67
                    It could be carried out on any former BTRZ, suitably equipped

                    difficult for BTRZ. And expensive. But in any case, the car is interesting, demonstrates the potential level of design bureaus and industry.
                    1. svp67
                      svp67 26 August 2019 06: 50
                      0
                      Quote: Gregory_45
                      difficult for BTRZ. And expensive.
                      Difficult - yes, expensive - yes. But one cannot do without re-equipping the army with new cars.
                      And after all, something needs to be done. Rostec does not cope.
                2. prodi
                  prodi 26 August 2019 09: 36
                  0
                  Quote: Gregory_45
                  For one simple reason - for the same reason why a merkava cannot have armor protection comparable to tanks of a classic layout in the nose. The engine and transmission are heavier than armor. But at the same time they are not protection, for a structure made of aluminum and cast iron punched with crowbar or kumstroy, filled with solarium and oil - well, this is not protection ... The fact that the power block in the nose serves as protection is a myth.

                  there is not so simple. For tanks - yes, but for light armored vehicles a completely sensible solution. Of course, placing a deserted combat module above a low engine in the center of the car with the gearbox in front (as in World War II) would be possible and optimal. But I remember, I came across a video where some fool , for the sake of laughter, shot from the PAK-40, as I understood it with armor-piercing, in the mug of a large jeep from 50-100 meters. The shell fell under the radiator and disassembled the engine to the very rear wall of the unit, however, the interior seemed to remain unaffected: the door opened easily and everything looked normal
                  1. Grigory_45
                    Grigory_45 26 August 2019 10: 09
                    -1
                    Quote: prodi
                    for light armored vehicles a completely robust solution

                    Hello, who argues that? Because for the BMP / BTR it is necessary to ensure a comfortable landing / dismounting of the landing, and for this - to free the stern. And you won’t move the turret to the stern to ensure normal weight distribution (now, however, it is possible to put uninhabited modules that do not eat the inhabited volume, and they use it) Which, however, does not add to the machine's classic layout (talking about BMP) security. The power block is heavier than armor, while it is not an adequate armor. For BMPs and armored personnel carriers this is reasonable, since any technique is a compromise between many, sometimes mutually exclusive, requirements.
    2. Grigory_45
      Grigory_45 25 August 2019 17: 12
      -1
      Quote: kunstkammer
      And if on BMP-1 hang the same protection as on Kurganets and put mine protection on the bottom?

      chassis can not stand it. And a complete alteration of the case. In general, the machine is not worth such an investment. And the car will lose buoyancy, which MO strongly disagrees with.

      They tried to hang up an additional armor on the BMP-2 (the Afghan version, the BMP-2D) - it pulls with great difficulty, and you won’t put it on the forehead - there is a power unit.
  15. Strashila
    Strashila 25 August 2019 17: 11
    0
    Let's start with the basic, and what the army needs, they determine the parameters of the machine. Everything is determined by the margin of safety for upgrades. There are many options, you can put DZ and KAZ, various kinds of screens. Follow the British path and establish additional protection using technology of multilayer materials installed on heavy tanks. As a result, everything rests against the cost.
  16. Corn
    Corn 25 August 2019 17: 42
    +1
    I see no reason. To expose such a cardinal and costly modernization to a morally obsolete machine.
  17. Konatantin 1992
    Konatantin 1992 25 August 2019 18: 15
    +1
    We don’t put KAZ on tanks in series with us, and we will wait on the BMP ... for sure ...
  18. The comment was deleted.
  19. Saxahorse
    Saxahorse 25 August 2019 20: 02
    -3
    It is amazing how much fuss around the frankly unsuccessful vehicle - the BMP-3. I can't even imagine how they managed to shove this stuff into the military! The stupidest thing that can be done for an infantry fighting vehicle is to worsen the landing capabilities! In a fight on all fours, it was only our "eagles" who could have thought of it .. The BMP-3 is a freak that requires immediate decommissioning in metal, well, or sales to any Arabs who do not understand anything in armored vehicles.

    And even manufacturers themselves understand what nonsense they froze. The development of both Dragun and Kurganets clearly confirms that our engineers are still adequate. I am ashamed of them for the BMP-3. But effective managers are not ashamed! Modules of modernization for this trash come up, are looking for ways to still cut the dough from this squalor!
    1. Disant
      Disant 26 August 2019 20: 23
      -3
      uncle, minus from me.
      where and why did you gather on all fours? do you even compare bmp-3? with opa or with a finger?
      nonsense, eagles, froze, freak, trash ... Bother to wash your tongue with soap and explain normally that you are not comfortable in the car.
      especially for you uncle
      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2YHnqxBIG70
      1. Saxahorse
        Saxahorse 27 August 2019 00: 22
        0
        Quote: Disant
        where and why did you gather on all fours?

        On all fours, as I see, you yourself like to fight. Do you even bother to watch your video? And there 10 times they called the main claim to the BMP-3. This is a little bit of something adapted for transporting several people.

        So you have to leave the landing compartment under enemy fire.


        And how the front two arrows will land and no one thought at all. The car is no good. Once they made a light tank, it should be used as a tank. But empty chimes do not understand any differences. Therefore, normal BMPs like Kurganets are without orders and are urged to invest extra money in this trash.
        1. Disant
          Disant 27 August 2019 03: 05
          0
          Sahahorse, stop grimacing - you will not please. The infantry designer was offered an infantry fighting vehicle with a firepower of a tank instead of a machine gun with a little fluff, and you pour mud on it.
          There are few cars in the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation, not because it is bad, but because it is relatively expensive. The transmission is expensive. Metals are expensive - an aircraft is transportable, floating.
          If you are talking about the landing of shooters near the driver, so they have a landing-landing on the car through an individual hatch, do not worry. If you are about to land, in order to go behind under the cover of armor (emergency exit) - then yes, you have to climb, but this is not a limousine.
          The car is thirty years old, and it is still the best infantry fighting vehicle in the world. In the world. Chop on your nose.
          Your future notch is confirmed by the mega-purchase of a huge amount of these machines from one of the richest countries in the world, the UAE, the purchase of another, one of the most powerful countries in the world, China, the license to manufacture it, the purchase of a huge number of cars from one of the most warring countries, Iraq, as well as many further modifications and improvements in the country of production, what is happening to this day.
          I do not see BMP-3 competitors in terms of qualities. If you can - call me, they will immediately scatter you to smithereens
          the photo you posted at the time of dismounting - again I’ll ask - what do you compare together? With the release of infantry from BMD Bradley or from MTLB at ground level? then let's compare their profile.
  20. East Kazakhstan
    East Kazakhstan 26 August 2019 05: 38
    0
    The T-4 tank also weighed 18 tons at the beginning ...
  21. Sergei N 58912062
    Sergei N 58912062 2 December 2022 03: 45
    0
    I wonder when will our armored vehicles finally receive KAZ?