Military Review

Fighting compartment "Epoch": in patents and in metal

102
Fighting compartment "Epoch": in patents and in metal

The combat department "Epoch" in the KBP workshop, 2013. Shot from the t / p "Serving Russia", t / c "Star", issue. December 15, 2013


In mid-2013, for the first time, information about a promising remotely controlled combat module (DBM) / combat compartment (BO) with the code "Age" first appeared in the public domain. Subsequently, the industry published new data and showed the finished sample. To date, two versions of DBM / BO have been created; patents have been obtained for both projects.

First option


In October of the same 2013, shortly after the publication of the first data, the authors of the Epoch applied for a patent. Document RU 2542681 C1 “Combat compartment of an armored object” was published on February 20, 2015. The authors of the invention appear N.I. Khokhlov, L.M. Shvets, S.V. Timofeev, K.V. Artyushkin, Yu.K. Zernov and A.G. Artyukh. Patent holder - OJSC “KBP named after Academician Shipunov. "

The patent describes the design of BO, made on the basis of a low-profile tower with the most dense arrangement of units. All the main components and devices, including ammunition boxes, are located inside the cap and do not require allocation of space inside the body of the carrier armored vehicle. In this case, all the necessary systems and weapons were used.


Side view of the module from patent RU 2542681 C1

BO from the patent is equipped with a movable unit with an automatic gun and coaxial machine gun. On the sides of the hood are two twin launchers of anti-tank systems. In the frontal part of the tower and on its roof are placed the optoelectronic blocks of the sights of the gunner and commander. It also provides for the installation of smoke curtains, laser radiation sensors, meteorological measurement systems, etc.

A new type of DBM / BO is controlled from the operator’s gunner’s workstation located inside the armored vehicle’s body. The fire control system should provide for the observation and search of targets, their automatic tracking and calculation of data for firing.

The patent notes that the proposed design of the fighting compartment has significant advantages over existing ones, including serial. The special architecture and equipment provide enhanced combat and operational characteristics, as well as increase the level of crew protection. To install such a BO does not require large volumes inside the carrier, and its small dimensions help reduce external projections and reduce vulnerability in battle.


View from above. Visible basic layout solutions and placement of units

The real "Epoch" combat module, built in accordance with the patented project, is equipped with an automatic 2A42 gun, a PKT machine gun and the Kornet anti-tank system. Like that weapon, repeatedly tested in other projects, supplemented by modern electronic means.

Second version


At the Army-2017 forum, the Tula KBP showed several models of promising equipment, including new version of BO "Epoch". It differed from the already well-known composition of equipment and weapons. Measures were taken to increase the combat and operational characteristics.

An application for this version of the “Combat compartment of an armored object” was submitted to the Patent Office in November 2018. Patent RU 2703695 C1 was published on October 21, 2019. This time, the patent holder is Russia represented by the Ministry of Defense. The inventors - N.I. Khokhlov, L.M. Shvets, O.A. Borovykh, S.V. Timofeev, Yu.K. Zernov, B.V. Burlakov, K.V. Artyushkin, S.V. Tokarev and A.V. Evsin.


The second version of BO, enshrined in patent RU 2703695 C1. Significant changes are noticeable - first of all, a new machine gun cover (18), the presence of a hatch for the second ATGM (10) and an air intake grille (19)

Some of the main features of the architecture of the BO remained unchanged. Saved compact cap; all units are located outside the carrier machine. There are also machine gun-cannon and missile weapons, as well as various means for controlling it. At the same time, the design of the tower was finalized, including to complement the weapons complex with new means.

In the central part of the hood, a swinging installation for automatic guns is maintained. The machine gun is carried outside the tower and placed at its port side in a separate casing. ATGM launchers are stored on board the BO. The roof of the product is still given for the installation of sighting and other devices.

The main innovation is an additional missile system. In the aft niche of the tower, on the port side, a shaft with a double hatch is provided. It houses a retractable launcher for guided missiles of smaller caliber. In the stowed position, it is located inside the protected volume; before starting - it moves out.

The new BO is able to improve the running characteristics of the equipment. On the right on the roof of the tower there is an air intake window. Through the internal volumes of the fighting compartment and the overhead space, atmospheric air should be supplied to the power plant. Due to this, the ford depth increases, overcome without the risk of flooding the air intake device.


Front view

Like the previous version, the new version of the BO from KBP should ensure the growth of the combat and operational characteristics of existing and promising light armored vehicles. It retains part of the advantages of the first modification, and also gets new features.

The second version of the "Epoch" was shown at exhibitions in the form of a layout; its main features were also revealed. It is proposed to use the LShO-57 57-mm automatic low-ballistic gun as the “main caliber”. The machine gun and the main anti-tank systems remain the same. Aft retractable launcher is designed for the promising Bulat complex with a small-sized guided missile.

From patent to product


The first materials on the “Epoch” were published in 2013. Later new messages appeared, and in 2017 the first information about future production and deliveries arrived. The first contract for the supply of new combat modules / combat units was signed at the Army 2017 forum.


Layout BMP-3 with the module "Age" of the second version. Photo Bastion-Karpenko.ru

In accordance with the new contract, the KBP should modernize the BMP-3 infantry fighting vehicles with the installation of the Epoch BO. The quantity, cost and delivery time of new products were not specified. Also, the complete set of modules was not revealed. The first batch of upgraded BMP-3 was intended for experimental military operation.

At the beginning of 2019, the leadership of the Ministry of Defense reported that an experimental batch of BMP-3 with the "Age" to enter the army before the end of the year. It was also planned to conclude a new contract for the supply of over 150-160 BMP-3. Whether they will receive a promising fighting compartment has not been specified.

At the very end of last year, the Ministry of Defense held an exhibition of promising samples. At this event, for the first time openly showed a new version of the "Age" with a 57-mm cannon and two missile systems. Near the module itself, its ammunition was demonstrated.

Interesting news arrived in early January 2020. The press service of the Ministry of Defense announced that this year the ground forces will receive a number of new models of equipment. Among them there is a batch of upgraded BMP-3s with the Epoch combat module. It is reported that a modification with a 57 mm gun and machine gun was used. Probably, it was a batch of equipment that was expected last year, but was delayed for one reason or another.


New products at the exhibition in December 2019. In the foreground - Bulat and Kornet missiles. Shot from the report of the t / c "Russia 1"

Thus, after several years of waiting, the army still receives the required modernized armored vehicles with the desired combat and operational capabilities. The batch of updated BMP-3 will allow to conduct tests and draw conclusions. With a favorable development of events, all this will lead to the adoption of the "Epoch" into service.

Results of the upgrade


A lot of time has passed since the first information about the Epoch project appeared. For a number of reasons, the new development has not yet reached full operation in the army, and it only has to enter military trials. However, the available information shows that time was not wasted, and industry used it to obtain the most interesting results.

The first version of the BO / DUBM “Epoch”, materials on which appeared since 2013, proposed new solutions of a layout and other nature, but the increase in combat qualities could be insufficient. As a result of this, a second project appeared with a more powerful gun and two ATGMs. This time it was possible to combine the benefits of a layout nature and seriously improve fire performance.

According to the latest news, in the current modernization of the BMP-3, the second version of the "Epoch" with a modern 57-mm cannon, as well as the Cornet and Bulat missiles, is used for experimental military operation. Apparently, it is precisely this option of the combat compartment that is considered by the military as a promising model for rearmament. It has serious advantages over the previous version of "Epoch" and is of much greater interest. And this fully justifies the existing time delay.
Author:
102 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. svp67
    svp67 26 February 2020 05: 54 New
    +1
    Through the internal volumes of the fighting compartment and the overhead space, atmospheric air should be supplied to the power plant.
    Masterpiece, this and the air purifier with the HLF were pushed into the tower?
  2. Slavutich
    Slavutich 26 February 2020 06: 24 New
    0
    At the beginning of 2019, the leadership of the Ministry of Defense reported that the experimental batch of BMP-3 with the "Age" to enter the army before the end of the year.

    Interesting news came in early January 2020. The press service of the Ministry of Defense announced that this year the ground forces will receive a number of new models of equipment.

    Press office or fake news?
    Why is this useless information, when they take up combat duty, then perhaps it is necessary to report, and then, what is our armament, study potential opponents.
    1. nickname7
      nickname7 26 February 2020 18: 10 New
      +2
      after several years of waiting, the army still gets the required modernized armored vehicles

      the new development has not yet reached full operation in the army

      Yes, the army is already getting, but the equipment has not yet reached there, apparently a failure of the time continuum, however, a loop in time.

  3. The comment was deleted.
  4. Cruorvult
    Cruorvult 26 February 2020 06: 35 New
    -4
    IMHO for BMP 2a91 is more profitable than LShO-57.
    1. Private-K
      Private-K 26 February 2020 08: 25 New
      0
      Than? Can you substantiate or just "have an opinion"?
      1. Lopatov
        Lopatov 26 February 2020 08: 57 New
        +5
        Quote: Private-K
        Than? Can you substantiate or just "have an opinion"?

        Higher chance of hitting armored targets
        Lower probability of infantry and TCP damage in trenches due to high projectile speed

        In general, it is less effective for "soft targets". At LSHO, the projectile weighs slightly more, but has a much higher filling factor. That is, the power of HE shells / grenades on the target is higher. Both high-explosive and fragmentation action
        1. Private-K
          Private-K 26 February 2020 22: 27 New
          -5
          I knew that the commentator I was referring to would not be able to answer. wink
          Quote: Spade
          Higher chance of hitting armored targets

          1. It is necessary to have exactly for the destruction of armored objects automatic the gun? No. Moreover, it’s simply harmful: the multiple increase in the weight of the artillery system, a sharp complication of service and cost. Just a gun with automated loading with the choice of ammunition type is much more practical.

          2. Does the Russian motorized infantry have a pronounced problem with the defeat of light and medium armored vehicles, etc.? With the saturation of the motorized infantry anti-tank systems on BM, man-portable anti-tank systems, the presence of self-propelled anti-tank missiles and, finally, a good saturation of troops with their own tanks? And if you recall the artillery and fuel dispensers, then the problem with the defeat of armored vehicles of the Ave. will not be a problem at all, since it has been solved long ago and this condition is confidently maintained and even improved, since the number of armored vehicles of the Ave. is only decreasing.

          3. The maximum penetration rate of the Russian 57-mm OBPS (hypothetical, note, because there isn’t one - it still needs to be developed, tested, set up production ... give a lot of money, allocate human and production resources) - not a big deal. 200 mm. To protect the newly arrived at the arsenal of probable production of BTT samples at such a level is quite affordable. Those., after all work and investment, can be obtained from the arsenal of the main combat means of motorized infantry, infantry fighting vehicles, guns not capable guaranteed destroy one hit BTT pr-ka.

          4. And now, we look at the combat module that the Russian military is actually experiencing at the military level: it is armed with two types of ATGMs. The first is a heavy Cornet guaranteed to destroy almost any armored target right up to the MBT. The second is the small-caliber Bulat. She can, also guaranteed, destroy any BMP / BTR pr-ka (MBT she will not take, well, of course, on board - yes). Cool, huh? In addition, I am completely sure that pair missiles are foreseen for two missiles at once: light for distracting KAZ pr-ka and heavy for actually hitting an object.

          Lower probability of infantry and TCP damage in trenches due to high projectile speed

          Given all the parameters, we can confidently say that 57-mm low-ballistic gun will be 4 times more effective 57-mm hole punch in the fight against infantry, etc., incl. shuffling in the folds of the terrain, in buildings, behind fences, embankments, etc.

          All that I wrote, for the General Staff of the Russian Federation, for the State Academic Technical University and the Grau of the Russian Federation, is more than obvious. Therefore, the 57-mm machine will never be adopted by BMP Ros. army.
          1. missuris
            missuris 27 February 2020 01: 09 New
            +3
            LShO-57 has a too low projectile speed, at the level of sound speed, the modern KAZ implemented will successfully intercept them.
            the size of the 57mm projectile allows you to now mount a budgetary system of air blasting of ammunition above, before or after soldiers or other objects.
            The 57mm 2a91 air blast shell can intercept low-cost tactical drones and ammunition. approximately 900m / s.
            The 57mm projectile of an air blast from the LShO-57 has less interception capabilities, as flies slower. approximately 300m / s.
            1. Operator
              Operator 27 February 2020 01: 25 New
              -1
              The first time in 32 years I read a meaningful text with the authorship of the Pole laughing
              1. missuris
                missuris 27 February 2020 01: 33 New
                0
                barked, I'm not a Pole, in the new passport I generally read like Ian)
          2. Cruorvult
            Cruorvult 27 February 2020 07: 15 New
            0
            1. Is it necessary to have an automatic gun to destroy armored objects?

            Armored objects are different.

            2. Just a gun with automated loading with the choice of the type of ammunition is much more practical.

            Nuk the same ay 220m modules have AZ and projectile selection.

            3.And does the Russian motorized infantry have a pronounced problem with the defeat of light and medium armored vehicles, etc.?

            And when we came across modern armored personnel carriers / infantry fighting vehicles that do not take the frontal projection of a 30 mm BPS and have a KAZ ?! Problems may arise.

            4. In addition, I am completely sure that pair firing of two missiles at once is provided: easy to distract KAZ pr-ka and heavy to actually destroy the object.

            Stupidity, your speed and range of defeat of different systems will differ, if you shoot in tandem, then they will be hit by one type, and not different.

            5. The 57-mm low-ballistic gun will be 4 times more effective than the 57-mm hole punch.

            Stupidity, where did you get these times, you have a mathematical model or on your fingers. For this, the 2a91 has programmable land mines.

            6. Everything that I wrote, for the General Staff of the Russian Federation, for the State Academic Technical University and the Grau of the Russian Federation, is more than obvious.

            Ahahahaha, that is why now on the state vehicles "Derivation" with a full-fledged cannon, and on May 9, a T-15 with an au 220m module will participate in the parade, this is all because the General Staff of the Russian Federation is all obvious.

            Well, I’ll add on my own that the fight against drones is still relevant, in this regard 2a91 will be more universal, and modern shells will help to cope with different tasks, from fighting modern equipment to fighting drones.
          3. English tarantas
            English tarantas 28 February 2020 15: 51 New
            +1
            Something you did not get into the truth a bit. Yes, the infantry has means of defeating the enemy’s equipment, but why armored vehicles are not needed, ATGMs will run out quickly, and reloading is not always possible, standard weapons remain. Up to 60mm caliber guns now need automation to defeat enemy vehicles, take a look at the dimensions of modern armored infantry fighting vehicles, and then remember the armor-piercing effects of 57mm, 40mm and even more so 30-20mm armor-piercing shells, and automation is also necessary to combat air targets, including armored , modern sighting systems and, in general, OMS are able to put in line the goal.
            not a big one. 200 mm. It is quite affordable to protect the newly launched armaments of the probable prospect BTT at such a level

            Caliber shells for small- and medium-caliber guns are made because, firstly, it is easier to hit the target, and secondly, protection against such armor penetration can only be done on MBT and TBMP and TBTR class vehicles. There are very few such machines, for a modern MBT 57mm BOPS even on board is ticklish, the line-up is already extremely dangerous, for a BBM with protection below the tank level a single 57mm shell is also not so scary (due to an armored volume larger than MBT), the line-up the car goes to scrap. This is the question of this statement.
            That is, after all the work and capital investments, it is possible to get armed with the main combat means of motorized infantry, infantry fighting vehicles, a weapon that is not capable of guaranteed destruction of one BTT pr-ka.

            Well, about ATGMs
            The first is a heavy Cornet guaranteed to destroy almost any armored target right up to the MBT. The second is the small-caliber Bulat. She can, also guaranteed, destroy any BMP / BTR pr-ka

            1. A heavy Cornet is guaranteed to break through any armored car, it is guaranteed to destroy not a fact at all.
            2. Damask steel can be guaranteed to break through the BMP / BTR of the enemy, destroy even less likely than the Cornet will destroy the MBT from the first hit.

            Given all the parameters, we can confidently say that the 57-mm low-ballistic gun will be 4 times more effective than the 57-mm hole punch in the fight against infantry

            I agree. But what have the thoughts about the need for automation in small-caliber guns to combat BBM and the effectiveness of the non-existent BPS for 57mm. And doesn’t it seem to you that in one gun you can combine a flat trajectory for armor-piercing and a hinged trajectory for HE shells?
  5. rocket757
    rocket757 26 February 2020 07: 48 New
    +1
    In general, combat vehicles are being modernized and equipped with defense and attack equipment. Now bring the control of the combat unit to the maximum automation of the process of combat use ... you look and will become a drone! Everything goes to that.
  6. DDZ57
    DDZ57 26 February 2020 08: 20 New
    +3
    for BMP 2a91 more profitable than LShO-57.

    BMP supports tanks, it is the need to destroy tank-dangerous targets located in shelters, therefore, mounted shooting.
    The 2a91 cannon is a weapon of high ballistics, a long barrel, high speeds - good for anti-aircraft guns, respectively - "Derivation".
    Cannon LSHO-57 - low ballistics weapon - not clear what - automatic grenade launcher? mortar? mortar? howitzer. Piece by piece. Good or bad7 I don't know - time will tell. If you compare the early photos and the current ones, you can see that the barrel has lengthened. That means they increased the speed. If you look at the reportage of the TV company "Russia 1", then you can see 2 shots for this weapon: from OFS and BOPS.
    OFS apparently subsonic, it has a lot of explosives - tank-dangerous targets, infantry.
    BOPS - a large propellant charge will allow you to get high speed, it is possible (or maybe not) it will be possible to fight with an equal opponent (Puma, Lynx) if the KBP learns to do BOPS, which the Russian Federation did not know how and can not do.
    No ammunition trajectory detonation.
    There is no mass production.
    They could have made a Bulat missile in 57mm caliber, then it would have been possible to make a shot with a guided projectile for the LSHO-57 - unification, albeit small, but there would be savings.
    2a91 and LShO-57 systems are completely different in terms of barrels and ammunition.
    1. Lopatov
      Lopatov 26 February 2020 08: 59 New
      +4
      Quote: DDZ57
      If you look at the reportage of the TV company "Russia 1", then you can see 2 shots for this weapon: from OFS and BOPS.

      Are you confusing anything?
      BOPS to the officially automatic grenade launcher is strange.
      1. Kolin
        Kolin 26 February 2020 10: 15 New
        0
        The one on the "Epoch" has a barrel of about 40 calibers.
        1. Lopatov
          Lopatov 26 February 2020 11: 39 New
          +4
          Quote: Kolin
          The one on the "Epoch" has a barrel of about 40 calibers.

          What's the difference?
          The ammunition is old ...

          And to create an automatic gun that can work with both low-speed and high-speed ammunition is unlikely at the current level of technological development
          1. DDZ57
            DDZ57 26 February 2020 12: 21 New
            +1
            American decision, the law of conservation of momentum. The sleeve at the BOPS is different. See pictures from the reportage, everything is visible there. You have a picture of the OFS a bit old, there is a difference with what is in the pictures from the reportage.
            1. Lopatov
              Lopatov 26 February 2020 12: 32 New
              +3
              Quote: DDZ57
              American decision, the law of conservation of momentum.

              laughing

              If you make an AP for high-speed ammunition, when shooting at low speeds, the automatics will not work.
              If done under low speed, then when shooting high-speed AP will fall apart.

              Such cases, the "law of conservation of momentum" works entirely and completely.

              Quote: DDZ57
              You have an old OFS photo

              It doesn’t matter, it’s the RP LShO-57
              1. Operator
                Operator 26 February 2020 12: 50 New
                +2
                Automation of a gun firing ammunition with varying recoil impulses works either on a recoil hydraulic brake with controlled throttling of the liquid and / or on an electric shutter drive.
                1. Lopatov
                  Lopatov 26 February 2020 12: 52 New
                  0
                  With such a difference in speeds, it will not pull
                  Only a complete replacement of mechanics with electricity.
                  1. Operator
                    Operator 26 February 2020 13: 23 New
                    +2
                    The initial velocity of the projectile is not the main thing for the automatic reloading of the gun.

                    The main thing is the recoil momentum, for example: 10-kg BOPS with an initial velocity of 2000 m / s has the same momentum as a 40-kg OFS with an initial velocity of 500 m / s.

                    PS Muzzle energy of shells (in the example, 20 and 5 MJ, respectively) affects the strength / weight of the barrel.
              2. DDZ57
                DDZ57 26 February 2020 12: 51 New
                +1
                Right for LShO-57 with tape power. The first variant of LShO-57 was with cassettes, then a tape, now a cassette. Have a new cassette gun, look for somewhere there was a patent, look maybe in this patent that on the module in the article.
                Look for the extended board of the Russian Ministry of Defense. The National Defense Management Center. On December 24, there was a presentation of armaments. There was a video from her, looked, but could not find. I don’t know, it can be removed.
                1. Lopatov
                  Lopatov 26 February 2020 12: 53 New
                  +1
                  Quote: DDZ57
                  Right for LShO-57 with tape power. The first variant of LShO-57 was with cassettes, then a tape, now a cassette. Have a new cassette gun, look for somewhere there was a patent, look maybe in this patent that on the module in the article.
                  Look for the extended board of the Russian Ministry of Defense. The National Defense Management Center. On December 24, there was a presentation of armaments. There was a video from her, looked, but could not find. I don’t know, it can be removed.

                  This does not solve the problem of insufficient initial speed for applying BOPS.
                  1. DDZ57
                    DDZ57 26 February 2020 13: 25 New
                    0
                    They answered you:
                    the main thing is the recoil momentum, for example: 10-kg BOPS with an initial velocity of 2000 m / s has the same momentum as a 40-kg OFS with an initial velocity of 500 m / s.
                    1. DDZ57
                      DDZ57 26 February 2020 13: 27 New
                      +1
                      OFS- 300m / s - 3,1kg
                      BOPS 1400m / s (as in the USA) - consider the mass, because I am old and blind.
                      1. DDZ57
                        DDZ57 26 February 2020 13: 43 New
                        +1
                        RF - mechanics gun;
                        USA - electricity.
                    2. Lopatov
                      Lopatov 26 February 2020 20: 17 New
                      +3
                      Quote: DDZ57
                      the main thing is the momentum of return,

                      ??
                      It’s a pity that I didn’t know when I designed the barrel and recoil device in the school ... It turns out so simple, but they were wise 8))))))
                      No, everything is much, much more complicated.
                      Therefore, they prefer to struggle with expensive remote fuses and complex data entry systems, instead of taking into account the ingenious "the main thing is the recoil impulse" and just shoot a heavy low-speed projectile from the same weapon.
                      1. DDZ57
                        DDZ57 27 February 2020 14: 21 New
                        0
                        It’s a pity that I didn’t know when I designed the barrel and recoil device in the school ... It turns out so simple, but they were wise 8))))))
                        No, everything is much, much more complicated.

                        Not harder. The main thing is who, how and what he thinks.
                        This is the difference between a civil engineer with a 6-year civil university + graduate school and an officer.
                        The artillery course was short, because this is not my specialty. But brains still remember a little that the law of conservation of momentum is used to calculate the recoil parts of the gun, and the momentum that the barrel received from the linear and rotational movement of the projectile along the barrel must be extinguished, for this an elastic connection is introduced between the barrel and the gun carriage. And then went calculations to convert the kinetic energy of the barrel into ... .... , thermal calculations, hydrodynamic calculations of elastic coupling, calculation of the battery to return the barrel to its original state, etc. etc. But the beginning of all this is the law of conservation of momentum.
                        And it turns out that a heavy low-speed projectile and a light high-speed projectile can be fired from the gun’s barrel, ensuring that impulses (quantities of motion) are equal — they are a measure of the mechanical motion of bodies and equal to the product of mass and speed. This will ensure the functionality (operability) of recoil devices for different ammunition. And the strength of the barrel will be ensured by not exceeding the pressure of the powder gases higher than that permitted for the gun for both ammunition.

                        Therefore, continue to torment further with expensive remote fuses and complex systems for entering data into them, and I will take into account the ingenious "the main thing is the recoil impulse" and just shoot a heavy low-speed projectile from the same gun, having fulfilled the conditions that I gave above.
                        So go on: drag the round, and roll the square, that's all I saw. This is the main thing in the army, and besides, I am also a senior officer.
                        So "I wish you health."
          2. Vovanya
            Vovanya 26 February 2020 13: 02 New
            +2
            Tukhachevsky put the crane in the barrel to reduce the pressure of the shot - this solution at the modern level can make the gun universal. There is a patent for installing adjustable pressure relief valves in the barrel of an automatic gun.
            1. Lopatov
              Lopatov 26 February 2020 20: 18 New
              +3
              Quote: Vovanya
              Tukhachevsky put the crane in the barrel to reduce the pressure of the shot - this solution at the modern level can make the gun universal. There is a patent for installing adjustable pressure relief valves in the barrel of an automatic gun.

              We had a company mortar on this principle. Naturally refused. A captured German actively used.
    2. Dzungar
      Dzungar 29 February 2020 11: 03 New
      0
      BOPS to LShO-57 ....? You do not confuse anything ....? Do you even know how the target is hit by the Armor-piercing Feathered Subcaliber Shell ...? And how can this be used with LShO-57 ....?
      1. DDZ57
        DDZ57 29 February 2020 15: 54 New
        0
        BOPS to LShO-57 ....? You do not confuse anything ....? Do you even know how the target is hit by the Armor-piercing Feathered Subcaliber Shell ...? And how can this be used with LShO-57 ....?

        In order not to be offended by each other and not to confuse anything, ask a specific question.
        I will give a specific answer to it.
        1. DDZ57
          DDZ57 29 February 2020 16: 37 New
          0
          And so: the speed is not less than 1400m /, the mass of the active part of the BPS is not less than 300g, the elongation is visible from the photo from the NTV program.
          As applied, it can be seen from Fig. patent, patent number next to the photo from the NTV program.
          1. Dzungar
            Dzungar 2 March 2020 11: 23 New
            0
            Sorry, but what are you going to hit BOPS from LShO-57 weighing 300 gr ...?
            1. DDZ57
              DDZ57 2 March 2020 15: 14 New
              0
              Sorry, but what are you going to hit BOPS from LShO-57 weighing 300 gr ...?

              I have written at least 300 g., Which means 400 and 500 g, etc. We are not talking about the exact parameters here. A serial product will appear, parameters will be announced.
              And since the gun barrel for the Epoch BM is longer, then its initial speed is higher than in the table in the picture of Lopatov (Lopatov), ​​respectively, and the amount of movement also increases, which leads to an increase in the speed and mass of the BOPS.
              The calculation is relative to the parameters of the tables, everything is feasible. It all depends on the mass of the pallet.
        2. Dzungar
          Dzungar 2 March 2020 11: 20 New
          0
          I’m generally an infant, although not simple. But even I know that BOPS is essentially scrap flying at high speed, more than 1500m / s. And striking the target with its kinetic energy. And firing BOPS is possible ONLY with a HIGH BALLIST gun, because only firing from such a gun can report a similar speed for an armor-piercing sub-caliber feathered projectile. How are you going to fire a BOPSnapry from an LShO-57, which is a low-ballistic weapon, but essentially a 57 mm easel grenade launcher ...?
          1. DDZ57
            DDZ57 2 March 2020 15: 30 New
            0
            The available momentum (momentum) of the "Epoch" weapon, and not the old LSHO-57 ", allows you to realize what you are talking about.
            For the French: a core weighing 550 grams can pierce a sheet of rolled homogeneous steel 140 mm thick from a distance of 1500 meters, its initial speed is 1500 m / s, the effective firing range is over 2,5 km, and the dispersion rate is about 0,3 mrad (thousandth). This is all feasible here, from the point of view of calculations, but in the Russian Federation such BOPS did not.
            I don’t know what will come out. Only time. Table for BOPS.
            1. DDZ57
              DDZ57 2 March 2020 15: 35 New
              0
              And BOPS shooting is possible ONLY with HIGH BALLISTICS WEAPONS, because only shooting from such a gun can report such speed for an armor-piercing subcaliber feathered projectile - the point of view is incorrect.

              Count the momentum. Everything is simple. And the low ballistic gun allows you to do all this.
  7. DDZ57
    DDZ57 26 February 2020 08: 44 New
    +1
    Although the ammunition for LShO-57 with trajectory detonation may be wrong.
    On a tower above the barrel, a device similar to a Doppler locator.
    If you teach him to transfer commands, and not just measure the speed to introduce corrections in the second shot, you get a trajectory.
  8. DDZ57
    DDZ57 26 February 2020 09: 11 New
    0
    BOPS to the officially automatic grenade launcher is strange.

    I told you: watch the report of the TV channel "Russia 1".
    If you look carefully and if you are a specialist in this kitchen, you will see everything.
    The Americans have applied this solution a long time ago.
    It is not always to watch it - to see, but to speak - it is to know.
    1. Lopatov
      Lopatov 26 February 2020 09: 32 New
      +2
      Quote: DDZ57
      The Americans have applied this solution a long time ago.

      ?
      BOPS with an initial speed of 300 m / s?
      Even for Americans, this is not particularly adequate.
      1. DDZ57
        DDZ57 26 February 2020 12: 23 New
        0
        Amers have at least 1400m / s.
        1. Lopatov
          Lopatov 26 February 2020 12: 28 New
          +1
          Quote: DDZ57
          Amers have at least 1400m / s.

          And we are discussing an automatic gun firing shells with initial speeds of 300-350 m / s
          1. DDZ57
            DDZ57 26 February 2020 12: 56 New
            0
            And we are discussing an automatic gun firing shells with initial speeds of 300-350 m / s

            For OFS - 300 m / s.
            And for BOPS - 1400m / s.
            1. Lopatov
              Lopatov 26 February 2020 20: 05 New
              +1
              Quote: DDZ57
              For OFS - 300 m / s.
              And for BOPS - 1400m / s.

              And to create a tool for the shooter is impossible.
              1. DDZ57
                DDZ57 26 February 2020 20: 15 New
                -1
                And to create a tool for the shooter is impossible.

                I dropped two pictures.
                USA and CBP. See below. And in school it was necessary to study well.
                1. Lopatov
                  Lopatov 26 February 2020 20: 31 New
                  +1
                  Quote: DDZ57
                  And in school it was necessary to study well.

                  They didn’t teach me how to design tools at school.


                  Quote: DDZ57
                  I dropped two pictures.
                  USA and CBP. See below.

                  And?
                  On one there are two guided missiles, on the second, "how we were able to cram a remote fuse into a projectile"
                  There is no evidence that there is a tool that can be both high-pulse and low-pulse
                  1. Operator
                    Operator 26 February 2020 20: 46 New
                    0
                    Any high-pulse gun is low-pulse by default - for this it is enough to reduce the propellant charge in the composition of the shot.
                    1. Lopatov
                      Lopatov 26 February 2020 20: 51 New
                      +3
                      Quote: Operator
                      Any high-pulse gun is low-pulse by default - for this it is enough to reduce the propellant charge in the composition of the shot.

                      If this gun does not have automation. Generally.
                      And here it is by default.
                  2. DDZ57
                    DDZ57 27 February 2020 09: 24 New
                    0
                    In the picture, where two missiles there is also a shot mock-up with an OFS (continuous, located vertically on the left), in the same place a split layout of a shot with a BOPS (a quarter cut, located horizontally on the right) and a split layout of a BOPS (a quarter cut, located in the center) - together the picture shows a set of ammunition used in the Epoch b / m, with the exception of 7,62x54 mm rounds for the machine gun.
                    The signs under the pictures are not readable, the MO made a report on this stand and from his words followed "ammunition for the 57mm gun." On a split mock-up of a shot with a BOPS, it can be seen that it has a longer sleeve compared to the sleeve of a shot with an OFS. A longer sleeve has a larger volume, respectively, more gunpowder will enter it, which will allow a light BOPS to accelerate to a higher speed than that of an OFS.
                    The American picture shows the technical solution, as with one fixed shot length for an automatic gun, changing the sleeve length from 165mm to 218mm can increase its internal volume, and as a result, the mass of the propelling charge. Because the mass of BOPS is significantly less than the mass of the OFS, as a result of which they had the opportunity to use faster burning powder. The increased mass of quick-burning gunpowder accelerates a light BOPS without exceeding the maximum pressure allowed for this system to the speed specified by the requirements of the technical specifications.
                    1. Lopatov
                      Lopatov 27 February 2020 09: 37 New
                      0
                      Quote: DDZ57
                      In the picture, where two missiles there is also a shot mock-up with an OFS (continuous, located vertically on the left), in the same place a split layout of a shot with a BOPS (a quarter cut, located horizontally on the right) and a split layout of a BOPS (a quarter cut, located in the center) - together the picture shows a set of ammunition used in the Epoch b / m, with the exception of 7,62x54 mm rounds for the machine gun.

                      Well, so beautiful.
                      But who said that these are shells for LShO-57 ?????
                      Even visually these are shells for DIFFERENT guns.

                      Quote: DDZ57
                      The American picture shows a technical solution

                      In the American picture, two shells with an initial velocity above 900 m / s.
                      That is 900 with a penny, of dist. fuse.
                      No less than three times more than LSE

                      Quote: DDZ57
                      as with one fixed shot length for an automatic gun, changing the sleeve length from 165mm to 218mm can increase its internal volume, and as a result, mass, propellant charge.

                      Quite the opposite. The Super 40 short-cased shell appeared later. The short sleeve is a consequence of the increased length of the projectile itself, because dist. the fuse is large enough.
                      1. DDZ57
                        DDZ57 27 February 2020 11: 12 New
                        0
                        But who said that these are shells for LShO-57 ?????
                        Even visually these are shells for DIFFERENT guns.

                        I answer you that these two 57mm shots with OFS and BOPS for the 57mm gun, which stands on the Epoch combat module "(KBP). This was said by the Minister of Defense, this is what I am telling you. I am responsible for my words, you can argue if live in Moscow, I may be there in March or in April, you can cross.
                      2. DDZ57
                        DDZ57 27 February 2020 11: 35 New
                        0
                        In the American picture, two shells with an initial velocity above 900 m / s.
                        That is 900 with a penny, of dist. fuse.
                        No less than three times more than LSE

                        Here we are not talking about the speeds of American projectiles, their sizes and fuses for them, I am talking about a "technical solution" that allows you to increase the internal volume of the case, so that while maintaining the size of the shot (cartridge) and reducing the mass of the projectile, you can increase the speed throwing an object.
                        The picture from the slide of the American presentation is only a visual illustration of a specific "technical solution" and nothing else is discussed here.
                        The specific design of the 57mm rounds of the Epoch BM (KBP "is shown in another figure. There is also a reference to the KBP patent, something can be seen in the drawings to the patent).
                    2. DDZ57
                      DDZ57 27 February 2020 20: 23 New
                      0
                      But who said that these are shells for LShO-57 ?????
                      Even visually these are shells for DIFFERENT guns.

                      On the shells do not write the name. On shells write the marking of explosives

                      No. For example, "T" is the marking, "TNT" is the name


                      This is the view of army men with three stars and two stripes and those whose shoulder straps are cooler and for which there are only two opinions: his and wrong.
                      I heard all this in Tula in one of the branches, when he was offered an original and simple technical solution for the housing, as a result of which the manufacturing cost of the housing was reduced to 15%, the efficiency was increased by about 10% (figures from the patent) (for the customer den , since efficiency was increased), my grandfather and I were morons and Siberian rams, all this was said openly, the procedure lasted seven years, until the rooster pecked, when another large partner sent the branch away, and the rooster came up to one place and the order caught fire , so in the periodicals for the month did all the work. So deceived in full, grandfather probably from this is still tossing and turning in the grave. Last time (2019), the same solution was given by improving the accuracy of fire from 38 to 58% (the figures from the patent in which they forgot to include the author), from their words: we have never received such accuracy of fire. Once again, a friendly kidok. Only having received a ready-made technical solution, they cannot understand where to go next.
                      The mentality of the nation.
                2. DDZ57
                  DDZ57 27 February 2020 16: 52 New
                  0
                  They didn’t teach me how to design tools at school.

                  And in our school there was the mechanics of heat engines.
  9. garri-lin
    garri-lin 26 February 2020 10: 14 New
    +2
    You throw a link to the video, and then tossing the tongue is not to shift the bags. People are interested.
    1. DDZ57
      DDZ57 26 February 2020 12: 25 New
      +1
      I did not remember the report from the presentation of new samples to the guarantor in December or January.
  • DDZ57
    DDZ57 26 February 2020 09: 30 New
    -7
    Now bring the control of the combat unit to the maximum automation of the process of combat use ... you look and will become a drone! Everything goes to that.

    But not for the Russian Federation.
    Israel massively used drones massively in 1982. The result is impressive. The complete defeat of the Syrian multi-layered air defense system (RTV, ZRV, ZA) in the Bekaa Valley. In Moscow, fucked up.
    Read, everything is in the internet.
    Almost 40 years have passed. RF began to engage in drones in 2000. But the word "engage" is said loudly, to speak, to show cartoons (ie jerk off in any direction, which is more typical for modern Russia) is more accurate.
    Unmanned systems are intelligence, navigation, computers, communications, optics, weapons system chassis.
    1. missuris
      missuris 27 February 2020 01: 20 New
      0
      all 7 components in the Russian Federation are.

      Unmanned systems are intelligence, navigation, computers, communications, optics, weapons system chassis.

      There are no open competitions with money for military drones, but there is technology.
      1. DDZ57
        DDZ57 27 February 2020 20: 46 New
        0
        all 7 components in the Russian Federation are.

        Yes, not 7 components are needed, but two times more, I am silent about electronic components completely.
        Where in the Russian Federation are serial civilian electric cars, hybrid power systems, serial bolometric matrices with what pixel size. Which navigation system to use, whose satellites regularly die? Where are civilian transport UAVs tested and driven?
        Why civilians, because the whole world already uses ready-made and proven technical solutions for the military, modifying them to the requirements of the military, because it is cheaper and unified. Etc.
        1. DDZ57
          DDZ57 27 February 2020 21: 00 New
          0
          and there are technologies

          And about the availability of technology.
          Everyone who understands a little should understand what 40 years is in a topic, including a serial one, practically "without restrictions". And how to catch up with this trendsetter? Only in cartoons.
          And about serial technology, a good example from artillery.
          Somewhere in 2010 a book came across:
          Israel and South Africa. An unnatural alliance. JAMES ADAMS.
          Printed in London (England) (I did not find the year, according to estimates until 2000 - I am afraid to be inaccurate).
          Talked about the investigation of the interaction of Israel and South Africa.
          Now it can be found on the Internet.
          1. DDZ57
            DDZ57 28 February 2020 06: 23 New
            0
            During the Doomsday War on October 6, 1973, the IDF first used howitzers with dl. barrel 45klb. / 19l, which provided a firing range of more than 40km, at the positions they had meteo and ballistic stations with Doppler radar and topographic detectors. Let the gunners
            they will report the result, taking into account the fact that the calculations are coordinated, they have fully mastered the instrumentation and at the landfills it was all rolled.
            1. DDZ57
              DDZ57 28 February 2020 06: 29 New
              0
              In 1977 Armscor (South Africa) received technology for improving artillery guns and making long-range shots for them. About a year and a half later, Soviet advisers in Angola were very surprised when it became very difficult to use the BM-21, because if they didn’t manage to get away immediately after the volley, then the position was covered by some kind of tailed shells.
  • DDZ57
    DDZ57 26 February 2020 09: 35 New
    -6
    Patents are one thing, and serial products are another. In the photo, a model with LShO-57.
    Layout and that says it all. This is exactly the same as the model of the Armata tank, which is shown in parades.
    This corresponds to the "prototype" of the aircraft of the 5th generation SU-57.
  • DDZ57
    DDZ57 26 February 2020 10: 12 New
    -5
    Now bring the control of the combat unit to the maximum automation of the process of combat use ... you look and will become a drone! Everything goes to that.


    You look and it will become a drone - the cartoon will be mounted on a computer and it will be possible to watch - in accordance with the realities of the modern Russian Federation.
    Israel mass-produced drones massively used in 1982. in the Bekaa Valley. The result was wonderful for Israel and terrible for Moscow. The multi-layered high-density Syrian group RTV, ZRV and ZA was completely destroyed. Everything is on the Internet. Almost 40 years have passed. It’s hard to imagine where they went even to specialists in this field.
    Unmanned transport combat systems include intelligence, computers, navigation, communications, optics, components, modern materials, engines, chassis, weapon systems, ammunition, etc. etc.
    Name at least one modern high-tech element from this list, which is mass-produced in the Russian Federation. An example is not from "fables" and "cartoons".
  • Izotovp
    Izotovp 26 February 2020 11: 20 New
    +1
    Why do not modern multi-barrel aviation systems be used on modern DUMBs? And in caliber 12,7 and in 30 mm. The higher the probability of being hit in one gulp at long distances. There was also experience installing aircraft machine guns on MTLB in Afghanistan.
    1. Andrey.AN
      Andrey.AN 26 February 2020 15: 45 New
      +1
      Unjustified ammunition consumption for a universal gun.
      1. Izotovp
        Izotovp 26 February 2020 17: 47 New
        0
        High rate of fire allows you to increase the density of fire at long ranges and reduce the consumption of ammunition.
        1. missuris
          missuris 27 February 2020 01: 27 New
          0
          Another recoil momentum per second is wild, just multiply the recoil of 1 gun by 6-13 times the number of trunks. and if you stretch in time with the long stroke of the barrel as at 2A72 we get a decrease in rate of fire by 1 barrel. Well, the system itself is heavier.
    2. sen
      sen 26 February 2020 16: 22 New
      +1
      The Americans used the M163 Volcano anti-aircraft self-propelled gun with a 20 mm gun.
      http://zonwar.ru/artileru/samaxod_zenit/M163_Vulcan.html
      Although it seems to me easier and more reliable to use the "mechanical twin".
      http://www.airwar.ru/weapon/guns/ultrashkas.html
      To the piston rods of machine guns are mounted gear racks, which are connected by a gear.
    3. Private-K
      Private-K 26 February 2020 22: 54 New
      -1
      Aircraft weapons simply cannot normally work normally in the surface layer - dust, you know.
      In addition, it is more difficult to maintain.
      1. riwas
        riwas 27 February 2020 05: 49 New
        +2
        As much as he can. The 2A38M anti-aircraft machine gun for the Pantsir C1 is an anti-aircraft modification of the GSh-30 30-mm double-barreled aircraft gun.
        http://vimpel-v.com/small_arms/kkp/1175-zenitnyy-avtomat-2a38m.html
        The main feature is an autonomous two-tank system of water-evaporative cooling of the barrel unit, which provides the ability to shoot significant ammunition under intense firing modes. In addition, there is a muzzle sensor of the actual values ​​of the initial velocity of projectiles in the queue, which contributes to an increase in the accuracy of the ZPRK firing. And the hardware is the same.
        1. DDZ57
          DDZ57 27 February 2020 09: 48 New
          0
          In addition, there is a muzzle sensor of the actual values ​​of the initial velocity of the shells in the queue, which helps to increase the accuracy of the SAM system.

          The speed correction in the ball calculator is introduced not actual (i.e., not of this shot, but of the previous one), the correction that was before it is introduced into the first shot (maybe some constant, but this is only for the first), in the second from the first etc.), i.e. this does not say at all that the initial speeds 1 and 2, 2 and 3 will coincide, because there is inside the batch dispersion of the initial velocity of the shells, inter-batch, temperature, etc. There is some kind of effect, but to the ball. the calculator introduces a correction for the speed not of the actual projectile, but of the previous one and, accordingly, of the drive, they produce a signal (error) characteristic of the previous projectile.
  • The comment was deleted.
  • Operator
    Operator 26 February 2020 12: 11 New
    +2
    The LShO-57 57-mm automatic low-ballistic gun is a light assault gun.

    Armor-piercing high-explosive fragmentation shot VBOF-57 with a programmable fuse and a flying away shell weighing 3,1 kg, plastic explosive A-IX-2 weighing 0,6 kg

    1. Lopatov
      Lopatov 26 February 2020 12: 50 New
      +2
      Quote: Operator
      plastic explosive A-IX-2 weighing 0,6 kg

      Here they write that OLA, that is, not hexogen, but metallized octogen
      1. Operator
        Operator 26 February 2020 13: 12 New
        0
        There are two types of OLA:

        OLA-29T: octogen - 53%, aluminum - 29%, binder (LD-70:
        a copolymer of methyl acrylate and acrylic acid 1: 0.3) - 18%, diphenylamine - 0.5% in excess of 100%. The detonation velocity is 7530 m / s at a density of 1.869 g / cm3. The detonation pressure is 20.5 GPa.

        OLA-8T: Octogen - 77%, aluminum - 8%, binder (LD-70, polyacrylic polymer, stabilizer) - 15%. The detonation velocity is 8430 m / s at a density of 1.84 g / cm3. Used in warhead for ammunition anti-aircraft missile system.
        1. DDZ57
          DDZ57 26 February 2020 20: 45 New
          0
          BB type OLA is not 2, but much more.
          1. Operator
            Operator 26 February 2020 20: 52 New
            -1
            It is even possible - the number of formulations of phlegmatized, metallized and plastic explosives based on HMX is currently in the hundreds

            http://libed.ru/knigi-nauka/399951-10-pirospravka-spravochnik-vzrivchatim-veschestvam-poroham-pirotehnicheskim-sostavam-izdanie-avtor-etoy-knigi-reshitel.php
      2. DDZ57
        DDZ57 26 February 2020 13: 33 New
        0
        A-IX-20 is not a plastic explosive and is not OLA. It is necessary to learn the materiel.
        1. DDZ57
          DDZ57 26 February 2020 14: 45 New
          +2
          OLA - plastisol explosive.
          A-IX-20 - refers to a press (thermopress) explosive.
          1. DDZ57
            DDZ57 26 February 2020 18: 24 New
            +1
            Patent:
            https://findpatent.ru/patent/270/2707476.html
        2. Lopatov
          Lopatov 26 February 2020 20: 03 New
          +1
          Quote: DDZ57
          It is necessary to learn the materiel.

          Exactly
          Great tip.
          If you were to follow it, you would understand what it was about.
          A-IX-1 and A-IX-2 are labeling. For RDX phlegmatized and metallized.
          A OLA- name for plastisol composition of metallized HMX
          1. DDZ57
            DDZ57 26 February 2020 20: 27 New
            +1
            This is the name of the types of explosives that are used to equip ammunition shells.
            - A-IX-20 (USSR) its composition.
            - RDX -73%, aluminum –23%, ceresin –2.4%, stearin –1.6%. High explosive high explosive shells. The detonation speed is 8000m / s. at dense. 1.75 g / cm3.
            Compositions A-IX -10 ... 30 created during World War 2, highly plastic, well pressed under normal conditions, physical. c Tabile up to 50-60 ° C. Until now, they are used in cumulative charges, fragmentation, high-explosive-fragmentation and incendiary munitions of small and medium caliber. Subsequently, they were modified by a change in the composition and content of the phlegmatizer: for these purposes, they used oxyzine, oxidized polyethylene wax (to increase temperature stability), a mixture of oxyzine with polymethylene methacrylate, etc. Currently, such compositions are equipped with thermal pressing.

            A certain distribution of explosives on a plastisol type binder that does not contain cross-linking agents was obtained: unlike thermoplastic explosives, plastisol explosives are processed at ordinary temperatures and cure when heated. Curing occurs due to the swelling of the polymer in the plasticizer - the transformation of plastisol into plastigel. They are characterized by increased throwing ability and low shock-wave sensitivity. The first plastisol formulations contained toxic and expensive fluorine-containing components of the FK type (FEFO) as a binder; later, they were replaced by cheaper nitroesters.
            Something like this.
            1. Lopatov
              Lopatov 26 February 2020 20: 37 New
              +1
              Quote: DDZ57
              This is the name of the types of explosives.

              On the shells do not write the name. On shells write the marking of explosives
              1. DDZ57
                DDZ57 26 February 2020 22: 17 New
                +1
                The name BB and the marking BB are synonyms.
                And to be absolutely exact - code BB. Prokhorov. Ammunition of artillery. 1973 (according to which I studied at one time).
                1. Lopatov
                  Lopatov 26 February 2020 23: 35 New
                  +1
                  Quote: DDZ57
                  The name BB and the marking BB are synonyms.

                  No
                  For example, "T" is the marking, "TNT" is the name
                  1. DDZ57
                    DDZ57 27 February 2020 13: 10 New
                    +1
                    No. For example, "T" is the marking, "TNT" is the name

                    The red arrow in the figure you indicate indicates the code of the explosive with which the ammunition body is equipped.
                    The marking has nothing to do with BB or its name.
                    This is just a sign, any paint applied.
                    On ammunition, decals are applied in the form of stamps, markings, special coloring and indexes.
                    Marking is a general concept and represents the marks applied to the elements of ammunition and capping with paint.
                    Marking is applied, it is not written.
                    I don’t understand what is going on, about the name of the explosives (complete with composition, just complete, abbreviated) or about the code for explosives (the conventional name for explosives), which is equipped with ammunition, in the sense of signs, fixed size, paint, color, on the case in the appropriate place (according to your pic).
                    If we are talking about A-IX-20, then this is a mixed blasting explosive, consisting of RDX, etc. in the text - this is the full name of the explosive and its composition, the full name of this explosive is mixed blasting explosive A-IX-20, the abbreviated name of this explosive is A-IX-20, the abbreviated name of this explosive coincides with its code A-IX-20 (conventional name), which is applied to the body in the appropriate place. There is also a factory name for this BB - "Product No. X"
                    (X, Y is a number or letter).
                    If it is trotyl, then its full name is brisant explosive trinitrotoluene, abbreviated as trotyl, tol, roofing paper, tritol, triton, THT; code (conditional name) - T;
                    factory - "Product No. Y.
                    Something like this, but I propose it is better to finish about the name and labeling.
            2. DDZ57
              DDZ57 26 February 2020 20: 38 New
              +1
              We had to start with this:
              Mixtures of powerful blasting explosives with a phlegmatizer
              Powerful blasting explosives such as RDX, PETN, HMX, etc. are highly sensitive to mechanical stress, which makes them unsuitable for equipping ammunition in its pure form. On the other hand, the use of injection mixtures of these explosives with TNT does not always simultaneously meet the requirements for the safety and high efficiency of explosives.
              Therefore, mixtures of powerful blasting explosives with additives-phlegmatizers have received quite a large practical application. Phlegmatizers are additives that reduce the sensitivity of the charge to external influences, improve the mechanical and technological properties of the charge (compressibility, continuity and strength of the charge, etc.) As a result, explosive crystals are coated with a thin layer of the phlegmatizer, and a decrease in sensitivity to fur. impacts occurs due to the redistribution and dissipation of energy (shock) by a relatively mild inert substance.
              According to the processing technology, such compositions can be conditionally divided into press (thermopress or thermoplastic), injection and plastisol.
              By the type of binder-plasticizer - compositions on an inert and energy-intensive (active) binder.
              Paraffin, ceresin, wax, etc. are used as the simplest and cheapest phlegmatizers. materials.
              Similar mixtures are used in ammunition and for the manufacture of detonator drafts and charges for the mining industry.
    2. DDZ57
      DDZ57 26 February 2020 12: 59 New
      0
      You can forget about it.
      The lack of elemental base, as for drones.
  • DDZ57
    DDZ57 26 February 2020 12: 17 New
    +2
    [quoteWhy do not use multi-barrel aviation systems on modern DUMBs? And in caliber 12,7 and in 30 mm.] [/ Quote]
    One of the problems is different operating conditions.
    The air is clean, there is no sand, dirt.
    12,7 - after-flight service or replacement - quickly. Folded up. With him at the cartridge factory in the CIS they fuck in full, and what will happen in the army.
    30- marine with cooling and electrocapsule (the Air Force also). No energy is working. Difficult to operate. The qualifications of the Air Force with the Navy and the landmates are a huge distance.
  • DDZ57
    DDZ57 26 February 2020 13: 40 New
    0
    For some reason, the comments disappear. Have to duplicate. And then doubles appear.
  • Grits
    Grits 26 February 2020 16: 07 New
    -1
    Hmm .... I read comments about shells here. As if the aliens were listening ...
    1. DDZ57
      DDZ57 26 February 2020 17: 02 New
      -1
      And in what specifically. And it seems that he went into the room, ruined the air and went out with a proud look.
      1. Grits
        Grits 27 February 2020 07: 21 New
        -1
        Quote: DDZ57
        And in what specifically.

        That did not understand anything.
  • daveduff
    daveduff 26 February 2020 19: 00 New
    +1
    Is there a mistake here? Maybe all the same we are talking about upgrading the BMP-2, and not the BMP-3? Why change the combat module in the BMP-3, which is already quite good? Moreover, BMP-3 in the army of the Russian Federation, I suppose, a couple of three dozen, while BMP-2 pieces of 100500.
  • Grigory_45
    Grigory_45 26 February 2020 20: 38 New
    0
    The new BO is able to improve the running characteristics of the equipment. On the right on the roof of the tower there is an air intake window. Through the internal volumes of the fighting compartment and the overhead space, atmospheric air should be supplied to the power plant. Due to this, the ford depth increases, overcome without the risk of flooding the air intake device.
    a rare idea of ​​genius! This is to drag the air duct through the BO, then through the inhabited compartment, through the firewall to the MTO. Wonderfully simple! And this despite the fact that neither in BO, in the machine itself there are no extra cubic meters.
    What did the air intake pipe not like?
    It would be better if instead of this dubious device, batteries were installed that ensure the module's operability in the absence of power supply from the chassis.

    In the current modernization of the BMP-3, the second version of the Epoch with a modern 57-mm cannon, as well as the Kornet and Bulat missiles, is used for experimental military operation. Apparently, it is precisely this option of the combat compartment that is considered by the military as a promising model for rearmament. It has serious advantages over the previous version of "Age" and is of much greater interest.
    Well, changed the "thirty" for the dubious merits of the grenade launcher - and suddenly the fighting qualities increased by orders of magnitude? This so-called "modern 57-mm cannon" is nothing more than the LSHO-57, or AGS-57, a low-ballistic weapon, in fact a semi-automatic grenade launcher, and far from new.

    It seems that they are trying to sell bullshit to the military. "Take, sorry, that we don't like it" ....
    1. DDZ57
      DDZ57 26 February 2020 22: 35 New
      +1
      It seems that they are trying to sell bullshit to the military. "Take it, sorry, that we don't like it" ...

      57mm OFS of this gun surpasses 82mm in power. Look at the spectrum of fragments - in the picture above (Shovels) - the grid deposited on the inner surface of the chamber provides very good crushing of the body. For this period of time, this is one of the best in its class munitions developed in the Russian Federation.
  • Operator
    Operator 26 February 2020 20: 54 New
    -1
    Quote: Spade
    At all

    You spoke about automation based on an electric drive above (I prefer controlled throttling of a hydraulic brake of a rollback).
    1. Lopatov
      Lopatov 26 February 2020 23: 40 New
      0
      Quote: Operator
      You spoke about automation based on electric drives above

      Too complicated for a combat vehicle

      Quote: Operator
      controlled throttle throttle pullback

      Yeah 8)))))
      Controlled viscosity recoil fluid.
      We dreamed about 10-15 years ago, but things weren’t there. Prefer work on undermining the trajectory.
  • Operator
    Operator 27 February 2020 00: 03 New
    0
    Quote: Spade
    Too complicated for a combat vehicle

    See 120 mm XM360 gun
    http://otvaga2004.ru/tanki/istoriya-sozdaniya/120-mm-mcs/

    By the way, the technology of manufacturing the fastened XM360 barrel allows "with a slight movement of the hand" to turn any low-ballistic weapon into a high-ballistic weapon - for example, wrap a modern high-modulus carbon fiber with a polymer binder around the barrel of a 152-mm D-1 howitzer with a length of 23 caliber, after which a new howitzer -the cannon will be able to shoot both 40-kg OFS (with a propellant charge of 8 kg of slow-burning gunpowder) with an initial speed of 500 m / s, and 10-kg BOPS (with a propellant charge of 32 kg of fast-burning gunpowder) with an initial speed of 2000 m /from. In this case, the recoil impulse will remain at its original level.

    If you remove the barrel bore (and use the feathered OFS), then the howitzer-gun caliber will increase to 160 mm, and the barrel’s life will be about 1000 rounds of BOPS - which is what is required for the promising MBT.

    For the prospective BMP, it will be necessary to reduce the caliber of the howitzer gun to 80 mm with ammunition from 1,25 kg of BPS and 5 kg of OFS.
  • Operator
    Operator 27 February 2020 01: 35 New
    -1
    Quote: missuris
    I am not a Pole

    Sorry bummer laughing