A few hours before the premiere: "Kurganets-25" with a 57-mm cannon


Layout BMP-3 with a new version of the "Age". Photo by Vitalykuzmin.net


Promising guns with a caliber of 57 mm are increasingly being used in domestic projects of armored combat vehicles. Not so long ago it became known about the installation of such weapons to the infantry fighting vehicle "Kurganets-25", then there were photos of such a complex, and now it is being prepared for display on Red Square. This version of infantry fighting vehicles can be of great interest both for our army and for foreign customers.

Short story


Early versions of armored vehicles on the Kurganets-25 platform were first shown five years ago. On May 9, 2015, vehicles in the configuration of infantry fighting vehicles and armored personnel carriers with combat modules of two types passed along Red Square. The BMPs were carried by the Epoch / Boomerang-BM remotely controlled combat modules (DBM) with an automatic gun of 30 mm caliber. In the future, the possibility of equipping the Kurgan-25 with other combat modules with other weapons was repeatedly mentioned.

In 2017, for the first time, models of armored vehicles BMP-2 and BMP-3 were shown with a new version of the "Age". It was distinguished from the existing DBM by another gun and an additional missile launcher. Already then the composition of the weapons was announced and the main advantages were named.

In November last year, Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu said that on May 9, 2020, the Kurganets-25 machine with a new version of the Age Epoch will take part in the Victory Parade. Just a month later, within the framework of the board of the Ministry of Defense, an exhibition was held at which a similar product was present. The "era" with a new cannon and missile weapons of various types was demonstrated separately from the carrier.

A few hours before the premiere: "Kurganets-25" with a 57-mm cannon

Demonstration model of the combat module, December 2019. Shot from the VGTRK report

In March 2020, photos from the first rehearsals of the future parade were freely available. Among other types of equipment, BMP "Kurganets-25" with a new version of the "Age" were present on them. Previously, such armored objects did not fall into the lens of photographers. The first public show was supposed to take place on May 9, but it was postponed to June 24.

Promising module


The new version of the Epoch DBM for the 57-mm cannon is similar to the previously created product, however, there are significant external and internal changes. They are associated both with the replacement of the gun, and with the introduction of fundamentally new systems. All these measures allowed to increase combat characteristics and expand capabilities in comparison with the base product.

The main and most noticeable novelty is the LShO-57 automatic cannon ("Light assault gun, 57 mm"), created at the Central Research Institute "Petrel". It differs from the well-known 2A91 used in the Baikal DBMS family by a shorter barrel length (about 40 kb) and the absence of a muzzle brake. This design leads to an increase in the height of the trajectory of the projectile, which required the development of new ammunition. Several products of this kind were first shown last year along with the DBM and its gun.

With a “short” 57 mm gun, several types of unitary shots are used, characterized by a shortened sleeve. High-explosive fragmentation and armor-piercing ammunition are proposed. The dimensions of the projectile in the long run allow you to create a programmable fuse.


BMP "Kurganets-25" with new weapons at the rehearsal of the parade, March 2020. Photo by Vk.com/4kantima

The coaxial machine gun in the swing unit is reused. On the sides of the DBM are kept the launchers of guided missiles "Cornet" and smoke grenade launchers. A niche is provided in the aft part of the tower for the advanced launcher of the Bulat light missile system. The combat module, shown last year, carried an installation with 8 transport and launch containers - two rows, 5 and 3 units.

Despite the replacement of weapons, the fire control system as a whole remained the same. DBM has two sights, for the gunner and commander. Unified control panels with instrument units, monitors and control handles are mounted at crew workstations. Probably, the replacement of the gun did not require a major update of the LMS - it only needed new software that takes into account different ballistics.

Wide range of tasks


The basic version of the “Age” DBM, equipped with several weapons of different classes, could hit a wide range of targets at different ranges. An updated version of the module is characterized by broader capabilities of this kind - this is ensured by replacing the main gun and installing additional missiles.

For the destruction of manpower and unprotected equipment or structures within a radius of hundreds of meters, a normal-caliber PKTM machine gun is still used. Most protected targets, such as Tanks or fortifications, at maximum ranges up to 8-10 km, they are hit by Kornet anti-tank missiles with different military equipment.


Front formation. In the foreground - "Kurgan", rear - BMP-2 with a combat module "Berezhok". Photo Vk.com/4kantima

The new LShO-57 cannon compares favorably with the usual 2A42 caliber 30 mm in terms of basic characteristics. Despite the decrease in ballistics in comparison with an alternative sample of its caliber, it surpasses small-caliber systems in firing range and the power of ammunition. There is also the possibility of hitting targets protected by 30 mm systems with an armor-piercing projectile. Along with this, an effective defeat of manpower and other "soft" targets at increased ranges and with an increased radius of destruction of a high-explosive fragmentation shell is provided.

The Bulat missile system is proposed as an addition to the Cornet and LShO-57 and should occupy an intermediate niche between these systems. A small-sized missile has advantages over a 57-mm projectile in the form of the possibility of guidance, a greater range and size of the warhead. Moreover, it is cheaper, more compact and simpler than a full-size rocket of the Kornet complex. Thus, the advantages of a technical, military and economic nature are achieved.

Not only Kurganets


The first show of the updated Epoch on Red Square will take place with the help of the Kurganets-25 BMP. Moreover, such a caterpillar platform is not the only potential carrier of the new DBMS. So, exhibition layouts arr. 2017-18 showed the fundamental possibility of installing the "Age" on the infantry fighting vehicles of old models. This allows you to seriously improve their combat characteristics and provide a certain superiority over a potential enemy.


Rehearsal for the Victory Parade, June 2020. Photo by the RF Ministry of Defense

However, the focus is on new models. Kurganets-25 with the Epoch is already ready for the show. In the recent past, industry mentioned the possibility of installing such a DBM on a Boomerang wheeled platform. However, samples of this kind have not yet been shown to the public. Perhaps they have not even been made yet.

It should be recalled that the "Epoch" with LShO-57 is already the second DBM with an increased caliber gun. Before him, the family of AU-220M Baikal systems with a long-barrel 57-mm gun appeared. Such modules were installed on a variety of platforms. For example, in the current parade two variants of vehicles with Baikal take part - TBMP T-15 and self-propelled anti-aircraft gun "Derivation-Air Defense".

Waiting for the future


To date, the first versions of armored vehicles on the platform "Kurganets-25" have reached state tests. The necessary checks will be completed in the near future, after which the start of mass production and development in the troops is expected. Apparently, the first to enter service are armored personnel carriers and infantry fighting vehicles with artillery systems of the old types.

The current state of affairs in the new Epoch project remains unknown - as well as the deadlines for completing the work. The situation is similar with other developments of the promising direction of 57-mm guns. There are a number of armored vehicles with such weapons, but not one of them has yet reached the combat units. However, the equipment is already being demonstrated on Red Square, which can indicate serious success and progress.

The introduction of Baikal and Epoch into mass operation will lead to the most interesting results in the context of combat capabilities. The same applies to technology on new platforms. The newest Kurganets-25 and T-15 infantry fighting vehicles with the new version of the Epoch DBMS find themselves at the intersection of two important areas - and soon the army will be able to use all their advantages. In the meantime, the public is invited to familiarize themselves with the new technology in the parade.
Author:
Ctrl Enter

Noticed a mistake Highlight text and press. Ctrl + Enter

124 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Snail N9 24 June 2020 05: 19 New
    • 10
    • 14
    -4
    The hinged .... looks somehow, not reliable ... You can probably disable, all the hinged ones, by firing from an anti-material rifle, and by firing from a heavy machine gun, fragments of mines and shells ....
    1. svp67 24 June 2020 05: 28 New
      • 25
      • 5
      +20
      Quote: Snail N9
      The hinged .... looks somehow, not reliable ...

      You can break everything ... how can you not hide it. This is what the low ballistic gun was used on, that is what causes great doubt. Maybe it was better to leave a 30-mm gun, and to install in addition an automatic grenade launcher, even a 57-mm caliber
      1. Aaron Zawi 24 June 2020 05: 35 New
        • 11
        • 2
        +9
        Quote: svp67
        Quote: Snail N9
        The hinged .... looks somehow, not reliable ...

        You can break everything ... how can you not hide it. This is what the low ballistic gun was used on, that is what causes great doubt. Maybe it was better to leave a 30-mm gun, and to install in addition an automatic grenade launcher, even a 57-mm caliber

        The gun on the armored personnel carrier is still primarily intended to support its own landing. The question so far remains open how much the operational safety of the DUM with a 57mm gun has decreased. On the other hand, the 57mm projectile has a higher explosive impact.
        1. svp67 24 June 2020 05: 50 New
          • 4
          • 1
          +3
          Quote: Aaron Zawi
          The gun on the APC is still primarily intended to support its own landing.

          I agree for the BTR, but this is the BMP and its tasks are slightly different, more extensive
          1. Aaron Zawi 24 June 2020 06: 09 New
            • 7
            • 3
            +4
            Quote: svp67
            Quote: Aaron Zawi
            The gun on the APC is still primarily intended to support its own landing.

            I agree for the BTR, but this is the BMP and its tasks are slightly different, more extensive

            That's for sure. I think with my stereotypes. wink
        2. carstorm 11 24 June 2020 06: 28 New
          • 1
          • 0
          +1
          for armored personnel carriers this task is secondary.
        3. NIKN 25 June 2020 14: 34 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          Quote: Aaron Zawi
          The question remains open how much the ammunition safety has decreased for the DUM with a 57mm gun. On the other hand, the 57mm projectile has a higher explosive impact.

          There is a double opinion. On the one hand, an initial increase in caliber was required due to an increase in the security of a similar technique of a probable enemy (all promising BMPs are protected from the standard 30mm), but then programmable ammunition appeared ... and now there is a promising 57mm weapon (shortened, etc.), and a high-explosive action should be used to the maximum, since it is.
      2. figwam 24 June 2020 09: 31 New
        • 4
        • 1
        +3
        Quote: svp67
        Maybe it was better to leave a 30-mm gun, and to install in addition an automatic grenade launcher, even a 57-mm caliber

        Americans are already testing 30-40 mm shells with remote detonation, such ammunition can effectively destroy enemy infantry in trenches and urban areas, and a 57 mm projectile fired in bursts will have an even greater striking effect, both high explosive and fragmentation.
        1. Reserve buildbat 24 June 2020 17: 34 New
          • 3
          • 2
          +1
          Judging by the video, shells with remote detonation are tested at a distance of 100 meters, after having previously passed this distance with a tape measure.
          1. Lopatov 24 June 2020 19: 08 New
            • 3
            • 0
            +3
            Quote: stock buildbat
            shells with remote detonation test at a distance of 100 meters

            To dispersion in range was not so noticeable.
            For advertising.
    2. Pessimist22 24 June 2020 05: 31 New
      • 1
      • 1
      0
      From the frontal projection it’s very difficult to get into the Cornet blocks, they look like the main target.
  2. Nikolaevich I 24 June 2020 05: 55 New
    • 3
    • 3
    0
    That ,, Epoch ,, can be used with different weapons (of different calibers) - there is a gut! But another option is also possible: the creation of a multi-caliber (bicaliber) art system! The Germans, for example, made a bicaliber (35/50-mm) tool, ... In our conditions, the tri-caliber system (40/45/57 mm) ... (40 mm for those , who, “bofors,” have a lot left ...; 45 mm for ,, internal use ,, ... and tradition, however ...; well, 57 mm, finally!). That is, "modular" weapons for "every" taste!
  3. Kot_Kuzya 24 June 2020 05: 57 New
    • 8
    • 16
    -8
    As shown by the experience of the Second World War, fragmentation shells with a caliber of less than 75 mm are ineffective in the fight against infantry. Therefore, I see no reason to change the caliber from 30 to 57 mm in the BMP. Both that and that caliber are ineffective for fighting infantry. In general, I see no reason to equip infantry fighting vehicles with small-caliber artillery, they are useless against tanks, and also ineffective against infantry. An infantryman will be equally deadly hit by a bullet of 7,62 caliber and a projectile of 57 mm caliber. It would be better to equip BMP PKT, an automatic grenade launcher of 80 mm caliber, and guided missiles to destroy tanks.
    1. mark1 24 June 2020 07: 04 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      Quote: Kot_Kuzya
      It would be better to equip BMP PKT, an automatic grenade launcher of 80 mm caliber, and guided missiles to destroy tanks.

      Or a 76mm automatic gun with D-56 ballistics (ZiS-5/3) and the possibility of firing at the CC
    2. a.hamster55 24 June 2020 07: 43 New
      • 3
      • 2
      +1
      But the adversaries are already protecting their ravings and strikers from 30 mm, so 57 goals are enough for lsho.
      1. Kot_Kuzya 24 June 2020 07: 54 New
        • 4
        • 11
        -7
        Russia and the United States will not fight each other, the Yankees fight only with the weak. As long as Russia has long loafs, the Yankees will not stick to us. And to force all Bendera and rodents to peace, the 57 mm is unnecessary.
        1. Alf
          Alf 24 June 2020 18: 36 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          Quote: Kot_Kuzya
          And to force all Bendera and rodents to peace, the 57 mm is unnecessary.

          And you do not consider export distribution? "First you take yourself into service, then we will buy."
          1. Saxahorse 24 June 2020 19: 35 New
            • 3
            • 3
            0
            Quote: Alf
            And you do not consider export distribution? "First you take yourself into service, then we will buy."

            That is how the completely unsuccessful BMP-3 was pushed into service with us. How many years have passed? So where is the normal BMP for the Russian army? Again, a marketing show for gentlemen of buyers at the parade show?
            1. bk0010 24 June 2020 21: 52 New
              • 0
              • 0
              0
              Dragoon is bad too?
              1. Saxahorse 24 June 2020 22: 30 New
                • 1
                • 2
                -1
                Quote: bk0010
                Dragoon is bad too?

                Nothing is heard about Dragoon. They claimed that he was ready for production five years ago. And everything disappeared from the screens ..
                1. Narak-zempo 25 June 2020 10: 01 New
                  • 0
                  • 0
                  0
                  Quote: Saxahorse
                  Nothing is heard about Dragoon. They claimed that he was ready for production five years ago. And everything disappeared from the screens ..

                  Classified
            2. Sckepsis 2 July 2020 22: 11 New
              • 0
              • 0
              0

              completely unsuccessful BMP-3

              Well, yes, just the best infantry fighting vehicle of its time.
              1. Saxahorse 4 July 2020 00: 27 New
                • 1
                • 0
                +1
                Quote: Sckepsis
                Well, yes, just the best infantry fighting vehicle of its time.

                Yeah yeah .. Then the Chinese categorically refused to buy this "miracle". We bought and licensed only the combat module. Which is truly one of the best in the world ..

                But the BMP-3 itself as a whole is just a marketing bubble. No one but the Arabs was able to convince her to fight. Well, besides ours, of course. Unfortunately, our generals have nothing to choose from, what was given in that and how to fight ..
      2. Lopatov 24 June 2020 19: 10 New
        • 6
        • 0
        +6
        Quote: a.hamster55
        But the adversaries are already protecting their ravings and strikers from 30 mm, so 57 goals are enough for lsho.

        I'm afraid the 30mm BOPS in terms of impact on armor will be better than LSE.
      3. sen
        sen 25 June 2020 05: 13 New
        • 1
        • 1
        0
        But the adversaries are already protecting their ravings and strikers from 30 mm, so 57 goals are enough for lsho.

        LSHO 57 has low ballistics, i.e. the initial speed is small by analogy with 2A70 somewhere 250-350 m / s. Kinetic projectile will not be effective. It means cumulative, but due to the smallness of the caliber, only against armored personnel carriers and partially BMPs. I think for this purpose it is more promising to use the UR “felt-tip” of the Bulat missile system. This new kinetic impact rocket. It has a subcaliber carbide core penetrator, instead of the usual cumulative warhead. Of course, such a missile has slightly worse armor penetration, but it is very compact.
    3. garri-lin 24 June 2020 09: 00 New
      • 3
      • 1
      +2
      There is information that on the impact of HE shells LShO57 approaching 82-mm mortar shells. And this is a lot. Especially the lineup.
      1. Kot_Kuzya 24 June 2020 11: 27 New
        • 1
        • 6
        -5
        Quote: garri-lin
        There is information that on the impact of HE shells LShO57 approaching 82-mm mortar shells.

        Well, the ZIS-2 projectile weighed 3 kg, which is comparable to the weight of a 82 mm mine. But still this is not enough. No wonder in 1943 they did not begin to arm the T-34 with a 57-mm cannon, since the fragmentation effect of 57-mm shells was not enough to effectively combat infantry.
        1. garri-lin 24 June 2020 11: 49 New
          • 6
          • 1
          +5
          The application concepts are completely different. LShO 57 automatic. Not one shell in a few seconds goes to the target, but several shells per second. Plus a hinged trajectory. Against the infantry is what you need. A shell with an air blast will just mow down manpower lying behind shelters.
          1. Kot_Kuzya 24 June 2020 12: 41 New
            • 5
            • 6
            -1
            I am skeptical about air blasting weapons. Imagine that a shell flies almost horizontally and explodes in the air at a height of 10 meters. Only 25% of the fragments will go down and hit the infantry, 50% of the fragments will go sideways, at a height of 10 meters they will not hit anyone, and another 25% of the fragments will go up. While at the mortar, the mine falls almost vertically, and almost 100% of the fragments fly sideways and at the level of human growth. Therefore, as shown by combat experience, 82-mm mine is much more effective than a fragmentation projectile caliber 57 mm.
            1. garri-lin 24 June 2020 13: 51 New
              • 5
              • 1
              +4
              Air blasting can be implemented in different ways. If the same mine 82 mm is blown up at a height of several meters, then the efficiency will increase. And it will be possible to hit those who lay in natural shelters or trenches. And if you get fancy with the mine itself and make a GPO with an expansion of 120 'into the front hemisphere, you get almost a weapon of mass destruction. Efficiency will increase significantly. And on the infantry covered in folds of the area and even more. LSEO essentially begins its journey into the troops. Ammunition stocks in warehouses are not many. Therefore, there is no argument like "a lot of cheap ammunition and we will shoot them." Need to do modern ammunition, smart. And consider them the main ammunition. And not cheap pigs. The hinged trajectory of the LHW plus the munition of air detonation with the directional expansion of the GPO will make this weapon very dangerous for the enemy infantry.
          2. Xenofont 24 June 2020 15: 25 New
            • 0
            • 0
            0
            The LLLF has a cutoff of 3 shots and then either switch to a different type of shot (the same 3), or reload with the barrel in the reload position, which takes some time.
            1. garri-lin 24 June 2020 15: 33 New
              • 1
              • 1
              0
              In the original version of the cartridge for 5 shells. Where does info about 3 come from? In general, in the context of the installation in the Epoch, it is unknown whether the number of ammunition is not a means of ammunition supply.
              1. Xenofont 24 June 2020 15: 38 New
                • 0
                • 0
                0
                I can not give a link to Courage: there the topic is sucked up with drawings from patents, etc. There is no cassette, loading up the sleeve.
                1. garri-lin 24 June 2020 15: 50 New
                  • 0
                  • 0
                  0
                  Did not find hastily. In the evening I’ll take a closer look. But he comes across a discussion of weight and not guns.
                  1. Xenofont 24 June 2020 15: 55 New
                    • 0
                    • 0
                    0
                    There somewhere in the subject of BMP or Kurganets. I didn’t find the same thing yesterday, but infa is 99 percent accurate. More than 3 shots in the Y-shaped bunker mounted on the gun breech were considered problematic in both size and weight.
                    1. garri-lin 24 June 2020 20: 17 New
                      • 0
                      • 0
                      0
                      Found. Kubaturu. Debatable. The patent is published more than six months ago. And not exactly what will happen on the Age. The size of the Y shaped receiver may be larger. 3 shells are few. But 5-6 is enough. And if the subsequent reloading and restoration of the aiming angle will take 4 seconds, then it is quite good. Although, to be honest, the scheme as a whole looks extremely clumsy. I came across her but did not pay attention thought fake.
                      1. Xenofont 24 June 2020 20: 26 New
                        • 0
                        • 0
                        0
                        There is no doubt, of course, but there is still no other information, so for me this is still quite acceptable.
                      2. garri-lin 24 June 2020 20: 32 New
                        • 0
                        • 0
                        0
                        Will have to wait. After a public display, usually part of the information is disclosed. May clarify in the near future.
                2. Xenofont 24 June 2020 16: 40 New
                  • 1
                  • 0
                  +1
                  Here, I found ... http://otvaga2004.mybb.ru/viewtopic.php?id=2200&p=8
      2. Lopatov 24 June 2020 19: 13 New
        • 1
        • 0
        +1
        Quote: Kot_Kuzya
        Well, the ZIS-2 projectile weighed 3 kg,

        It’s not about the weight of the shell. and in weight BB. In LSE and in 82-mm “short” mines it is the same
        Moreover, LLLF has normal RDX, and in 82-mm mines, usually various kinds of ersatz.
  4. abrakadabre 24 June 2020 09: 09 New
    • 0
    • 2
    -2
    It would be better equipped with BMP PKT, automatic grenade launcher caliber 80 mm
    Or maybe an automatic mortar? Mortars seem to be very good against infantry.
    1. Kot_Kuzya 24 June 2020 11: 28 New
      • 2
      • 0
      +2
      BMP should be able to shoot direct fire.
  5. Grazdanin 24 June 2020 09: 28 New
    • 4
    • 3
    +1
    Quote: Kot_Kuzya
    I see no reason to change the caliber from 30 to 57 mm in the BMP. Both that and that caliber are ineffective for fighting infantry.

    A very controversial statement, for infantry BMP 2 is much more dangerous than a tank. I watched Clooney’s interview, he estimated the danger from BMP 2 higher than from Ukrainian tanks, with 125 mm.
    We do not have shells with air blasting. This is scary when there is no way to hide behind cover. They seem to be trying to get around this problem.
    And since the Kurgan is needed in the army with any weaponry, the problem of our armored vehicles is not a weapon, but the survival of the crew and the landing force.
  6. paul3390 24 June 2020 10: 11 New
    • 2
    • 1
    +1
    Here, after all, one still has to take into account the action on the barrier .. Say - the enemy is sitting behind a brick wall or there is a clay fence .. Actions in urban or rural buildings have recently gained considerable relevance .. And 7,62 you will not spoil every wall ..
  7. The comment was deleted.
  8. psiho117 25 June 2020 21: 10 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Quote: Kot_Kuzya

    As the experience of World War II showed, fragmentation shells with a caliber of less than 75 mm are ineffective in the fight against infantry

    shells arr. 1916 - certainly ineffective, they have the formation of shrapnel fig. But modern ones, with ready-made and semi-finished fragments, an increased filling factor of the hull, and modern explosives are still as effective. Well, except 30 mm, they are so-so ...


    Quote: Kot_Kuzya
    It would be better to equip BMP PKT, an automatic grenade launcher of 80 mm caliber, and guided missiles to destroy tanks

    Well Duc and armed - LShO this is a large-caliber automatic grenade launcher.
    1. psiho117 25 June 2020 21: 39 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      By the way, Ryabov, as usual, confused in the article - the gun is called APGB (automatic grenade ballistic gun), index 2A94.
      the name LShO-57, apparently no longer.
  • The leader of the Redskins 24 June 2020 06: 54 New
    • 11
    • 20
    -9
    Maybe I’ll express sedition, but the author has painted too brightly the prospects ... Six years ago they sang odes to the same “fita", and so far she has not found a domestic or foreign operator.
    1. K-612-O 24 June 2020 07: 09 New
      • 7
      • 3
      +4
      Experimental military operation is underway and only after it can be launched into mass / mass production through the SRPP. GOSTs have not been canceled. And we will not be able to rivet and deliver raw equipment to the troops, so that we will always be able to further refine it, as with F35.
    2. carstorm 11 24 June 2020 07: 10 New
      • 9
      • 4
      +5
      at the first appearance of the T 14, the Germans and the French started talking about developing a car in her spade. it is not even in the drawings. the creation of new machines all the more new conceptually this is the years of testing what is happening. at the same time, on t 14 there is already a firm order for the number of more than serviceable Bundeswehr tanks. troops do not need raw cars. it is expensive afterwards.
      1. Grazdanin 24 June 2020 09: 15 New
        • 1
        • 10
        -9
        Quote: carstorm 11
        the advent of T 14, the Germans and the French started talking about the development of her machine in spite

        It makes no sense to make a new car for them. The modernization resource of those in service is not exhausted, unlike our Tzhek. T14 does not create a new challenge for them. In general, the concept of MBT is in question, given the development of new technologies of the same KAZ.
        1. carstorm 11 24 June 2020 10: 33 New
          • 5
          • 4
          +1
          But what does their potential have to do with it? combat readiness of equipment is the main criterion. t 14 can not but be a challenge for one simple reason-putting into operation in a compartment with existing machines. the last 90 are already more than modifications of Leo a 7. and then there’s a car with characteristics that also need to be stopped by something. What is the use of modernization if the last check showed that the combat readiness of the entire fleet did not even reach 50 percent? out of 400 hundreds of drillings (rounded off) 90 are recognized as such !!!! a little more than a hundred relatively ready-made. There is another important fact, the possibility of building tanks. in Europe it is now zero. they cannot but understand that this is a nightmare in the event of any war. even hypothetical. one tuning
          1. Grazdanin 24 June 2020 11: 37 New
            • 3
            • 8
            -5
            .
            Quote: carstorm 11
            out of 400 hundreds of drillings (rounded off) 90 are recognized as such !!!! a little more than a hundred relatively ready-made. there is another important fact, the possibility of building tanks

            For Western countries this is not a problem, the technical potential is beyond the limits. Upgrade, build a new one will take a little time. It does not happen that the enemy appears suddenly. If Russia begins to actively arm itself, Europe will quickly restore its fleet and production. I'm not worried about them
            The principle does not understand the prospects of MBT. Without electronics, KAZ, infantry support and other MBT equipment, it’s just a target. The same thing to hang on a lighter armored vehicle, the same will happen in terms of security, + Higher mobility. There are not many goals for a tank gun, it can be replaced with other types of weapons and smaller-caliber "smart" shells.
        2. Genry 24 June 2020 11: 41 New
          • 2
          • 4
          -2
          Quote: Grazdanin
          The modernization resource of those in service has not been exhausted, unlike our Tzhek.

          Just the T-72 line, with its "tight" layout, is ideal for the next generation of crewless robotic machines.
          1. Grazdanin 24 June 2020 11: 49 New
            • 4
            • 5
            -1
            T72 is a machine of 2 tank generation, originally from the 60s. To make a drone out of it, you need to remove all the insides and replace it with others. In fact, you need to make another car with a bunch of restrictions inherited from Tshka. It makes no sense.
            1. Genry 24 June 2020 12: 03 New
              • 1
              • 4
              -3
              Quote: Grazdanin
              To make a drone out of it, you need to remove all the insides and replace it with others.

              And how should these "others" differ?
              And they kind of answered, but completely empty.
              1. Grazdanin 24 June 2020 12: 20 New
                • 2
                • 2
                0
                Replace gun, AZ, turret (such as Burlak), detection, surveillance, communications, remove mechanical controls, replace transmission, engine, etc. In short, the body and chassis will remain. The entire T64,72 (90), 80 series is morally obsolete, so the best modernizations do not go to the army, only minor updates. It is not possible to upgrade the development technique of the 60s to infinity, everything has a limit.
                1. Genry 24 June 2020 12: 46 New
                  • 2
                  • 2
                  0
                  Quote: Grazdanin
                  Replace gun, AZ, turret

                  What for? The current cannon (more precisely, a shell) is outdated only for anti-tank purposes. The tank is commonly used as an assault gun.
                  Quote: Grazdanin
                  means of detection, surveillance, communication,

                  This is just a staged upgrade.
                  Quote: Grazdanin
                  remove the mechanical controls; replace the transmission, engine, etc.

                  And this is with a fright?
                  Yes, it is necessary to replace some control mechanisms with electric executors, but duplicate manual control remains even in airplanes.
                  Quote: Grazdanin
                  It is not possible to upgrade the development technique of the 60s to infinity, everything has a limit.

                  In this case, the modernization of the functional level. For new products, you can safely add technology from fresh developments.

                  The T-72 line attracts with its excellent layout (there is not much empty space inside and compact external dimensions) and excellent knot depletion. The lack of armored capsules, for protection against fire and fragmentation, is not critical in the version of the robot.
                  1. Grazdanin 24 June 2020 13: 00 New
                    • 3
                    • 2
                    +1
                    If you do according to your scheme there will be a narrowly specialized "assault gun" at a price higher than the 3rd generation MBT. It makes no sense.
                    For understanding, the price of “iron” and “mechanics” in modern weapons is a maximum of one third. And the concept of using crewless equipment has not been worked out and the technology is not enough. UAVs are an arched question, with them, if not strange, it’s much easier.
                    1. Genry 24 June 2020 13: 33 New
                      • 0
                      • 3
                      -3
                      Quote: Grazdanin
                      there will be a narrowly specialized “assault gun” at a price higher than the 3rd generation MBT

                      Why do I have a "narrow ..." product? Everything is the same as the T-14, except for the defeat of heavy armored vehicles.
                      And why should the price rise if serial components and components from the 3rd generation are installed?
                      Quote: Grazdanin
                      the price of “iron” and “mechanics” in modern weapons is a maximum of one third.

                      This is an iron third that cannot be changed by overwriting the "firmware".
                      Quote: Grazdanin
                      And the concept of using crewless equipment has not been worked out and the technology is not enough. UAVs are an arched question, with them, if not strange, it’s much easier.

                      In your opinion, is flying easier than crawling?
                      Technologies for automatic search and target tracking have already been developed. Automatic movement and route tracing are also (robotic cars).

                      A robotic tank can be given a larger virtual crew (at least 20 people with imagination and ideas) that will allow better use of weapons (search for targets from other sources) and the protective properties of the tank (search and planning of attack and retreat places, taking into account buildings, terrain and weather phenomena ) and will allow better interaction with allied military units (other equipment, infantry, "sky", art support).
                      1. Grazdanin 24 June 2020 14: 50 New
                        • 1
                        • 1
                        0
                        Of course, flying is easier than riding. Why do you think autopilots appeared in aviation in the 60s, and on cars only a couple of three years ago?
                        Now in modern aircraft, almost all the work is done by the autopilot.
                        Ground vehicles have too many variables to control. Obstacles, other transport systems, pits, soil quality, etc. In battle, it’s hard to understand where yours are strangers, people don’t understand that. There is not a single car that can move on rough terrain independently, only on public roads, with high-quality markings and signs.
                        The biggest problem is radio communications. If the equipment and control point are on the ground, then the communication distance will be measured in hundreds of meters, in the city by dozens. For normal communication, repeaters are needed. In mountainous areas and in the city / village, the equipment must be in the zone of at least 3 repeaters to ensure normal communication. By the way, cellular communication is called so because repeaters create cells.
                        So ground equipment will remain unmanned only specialized. An UAV will supplant a manned one already in this decade.
                      2. Genry 24 June 2020 16: 57 New
                        • 0
                        • 2
                        -2
                        Quote: Grazdanin
                        Of course, flying is easier than riding. Why do you think autopilots appeared in aviation in the 60s, and on cars only a couple of three years ago?

                        Autopilot is only an assistant to a person and does not replace him.
                        For real UAV operation, AI (machine learning) of a higher level is needed than a ground-based robot.
                        Quote: Grazdanin
                        Ground vehicles have too many variables to control. Obstacles, other transport systems, pits, soil quality, etc. In a battle it’s hard to understand where yours are strangers, people don’t understand that.

                        Even in the first Lunokhod, these problems were partially solved. More precisely, these are not problems, but obstacles that can be overcome head-on, in an all-terrain vehicle.
                        The robot sees its allies by the coordinates of the information system and by special wearable tags "friend or foe".

                        UAVs have the same problems, if not even more. It depends more on weather conditions and on the workload of the trains that need to be crossed.
                        Quote: Grazdanin
                        There is not a single car that can move on rough terrain independently, only on public roads, with high-quality markings and signs.

                        This is what you say about civilian transport equipment, since it is not cross-country and must comply with the rules of the road and not strain neighboring cars with its behavior.
                        But there are civilian all-terrain vehicles to which agricultural machinery can be attributed. For her, there are already systems for automatic processing of fields, when the machine itself sees its trace of the previous pass and is attached to it for more accurate work. At the same time, she sees all the obstacles in the form of people, pillars, animals, humps, holes, ditches and automatically bypasses them.
                        Quote: Grazdanin
                        The biggest problem is radio communications. If the equipment and control point are on the ground, then the communication distance will be measured in hundreds of meters, in the city by dozens.

                        Radio communication - yes a problem - it is jammed. Therefore, in the form of the main one, optical should be used through relay robots (ground or flying).
                        Quote: Grazdanin
                        In mountainous areas and in the city / village, the equipment must be in the zone of at least 3 repeaters to ensure normal communication.

                        In my country house, only one substation covers the territory. Checked by directional antenna when searching for faster internet.
                        Quote: Grazdanin
                        By the way, cellular communication is called so because repeaters create cells.

                        Did the bees tell you that? lol
                        Now substations are installed according to the principle of necessary subscriber capacity in an accessible territory (where it is thick and where it is empty). In cities, there are generally garlands of antennas.
                        Quote: Grazdanin
                        So that ground equipment will remain unmanned only specialized.

                        Just the opposite.
                        Railway is already close to trips with one driver per shift. Metro walks like this for a long time.
                        The first BelAZ-7513R dump trucks with a lifting capacity of 130 tons with a remote control system are already operating in real conditions. At the Chernogorsky coal mine in Khakassia, they transport overburden, moving along a 1350-meter selected area.

                        (https://rg.ru/2020/04/15/reg-sibfo/bespilotnye-belazy-osvaivaiut-rossijskie-ugolnye-karery.html)
                        Quote: Grazdanin
                        An UAV will supplant a manned one already in this decade.

                        Unfortunately no. Security requirements will not allow ....
      2. 5-9
        5-9 25 June 2020 13: 31 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        On the contrary, M1 and Leo-2 have long rested against the weight limit, so for about 15 years the most common filler in modernization is a secret mixture of nitrogen, oxygen, carbon dioxide and inert gases, in totalitarian countries contemptuously called armored air. Therefore, there is no NDZ, and if it is in the form of a TASK, then it is impossible to drive off the asphalt on the current tank, just as it will take a long and long drive to get bogged down, and the chassis will crumble.
  • Zaurbek 24 June 2020 07: 08 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Below, in the picture - a Cornet rocket and a mini Cornet. It seems to me that its roots should come from UAV ammunition. I wonder what range?
  • Kolin 24 June 2020 10: 05 New
    • 1
    • 1
    0
    BK - 186 rounds, 120 OFS and 66 BOPS. OFS with remote detonation, the thing that is above the trunk is a radio programmer.
  • Sahalinets 24 June 2020 10: 37 New
    • 5
    • 7
    -2
    Awful decision. The initial velocity of the shell LSE - 300 m / s. Here, even on infantry goals you are tormented by falling! And against armored vehicles, it is simply useless. On the BMP-3, at least 30 mm is a "low-ballistic weapon."
    Campaign on the development of automatic 45-graph paper put the final cross. It's a pity. It would be an ideal weapon BMP, better than any foreign.
    1. Kolin 24 June 2020 11: 26 New
      • 2
      • 4
      -2
      There is no LSE, there are 40 calibers and about 350 m / s at the General Pharmacopoeia ... if the powder charge has not been changed. Against armored vehicles - BOPS.
      1. Sahalinets 24 June 2020 11: 52 New
        • 5
        • 0
        +5
        What other BOPS with such ballistics? He will be even worse than a forty-year-old.
        1. Kolin 24 June 2020 15: 33 New
          • 0
          • 3
          -3

          By armor penetration at the level of 40 and 50 mm "super shots".
          1. Lopatov 24 June 2020 19: 14 New
            • 2
            • 1
            +1
            Quote: Kolin
            By armor penetration at the level of 40 and 50 mm "super shots".

            This is not for LSE. To another gun
            1. Kolin 25 June 2020 10: 02 New
              • 0
              • 0
              0
              This is to what stands on the "Age" ie APGB, aka 2A94.
            2. psiho117 25 June 2020 21: 43 New
              • 1
              • 0
              +1
              Quote: Spade
              This is not for LSE. To another gun
              the name LShO-57, apparently no longer
              the weapon for the Age is called APGB (automatic grenade ballistic gun). True, it seems to be longer than the LSE, so, perhaps, both guns exist.
              And yes, there is ammunition in the
              57-mm armor-piercing-piercing projectile of increased power 3BM76 shot 3UBM21 (designation KBP TKB-1003)
              (with courage)
              I honestly say, in the confusion ....
              1. Lopatov 25 June 2020 22: 27 New
                • 0
                • 0
                0
                Apparently, the source is here.
                https://studepedia.org/index.php?vol=3&post=6424
                however ... VOF57 is a shot at a 120 mm mortar.

                Quote: psiho117
                the name LShO-57, apparently no longer

                LShO-57 = AGS-57
                Of course not for installation in the combat module.
      2. Kot_Kuzya 24 June 2020 12: 54 New
        • 3
        • 3
        0
        With an initial speed of 350 m / s, use even uranium BOPS, there will be no use. To combat armored vehicles, a speed of at least 700 m / s is needed. No wonder the SU-122 was replaced by the SU-85, since the 122-mm howitzer with an initial speed of 500 m / s had disgusting useless accuracy, RPV and rate of fire. An 85-mm shell with an initial speed of 800 m / s was much more effective against Hitler's menagerie.
        1. Kolin 24 June 2020 15: 35 New
          • 2
          • 0
          +2
          BOPS has many times more gunpowder than OFS, everything will be fine there.
    2. Kot_Kuzya 24 June 2020 11: 30 New
      • 0
      • 4
      -4
      Come on! Information that the initial speed of 300 m / s is a fake. I can’t believe it. Most likely, the initial velocity in the region of 700-800 m / s.
      1. Sahalinets 24 June 2020 11: 48 New
        • 3
        • 0
        +3
        All sources say about LShO-57. And its characteristics are known.
        1. Kot_Kuzya 24 June 2020 12: 34 New
          • 2
          • 3
          -1
          If this is true, then this is a polar fox! For a BMP, a gun with an initial projectile speed of 300 m / s is simply unacceptable. At least it should be 700 m / s, otherwise the armor penetration and the range of a direct shot are generally worthless. The initial speed of 300 m / s is for a grenade launcher, but not for a BMP gun.
          1. Sahalinets 24 June 2020 12: 46 New
            • 6
            • 0
            +6
            Well, LSE is a grenade launcher. its other name is AGS-57.
            1. Kot_Kuzya 24 June 2020 12: 48 New
              • 3
              • 3
              0
              This is just a fox! Even the NS-23 armor penetration will be higher than that of squalor!
              1. Lopatov 24 June 2020 19: 15 New
                • 3
                • 0
                +3
                Quote: Kot_Kuzya
                This is just a fox! Even the NS-23 armor penetration will be higher than that of squalor!

                But the work on infantry and TCP is much, much simpler and more efficient.
                Moreover, cheap ammunition

                And let the tanks shoot at the armor.
    3. Genry 24 June 2020 11: 56 New
      • 5
      • 2
      +3
      Quote: Sahalinets
      Awful decision. The initial velocity of the shell LSE - 300 m / s.

      At the Epoch, it’s not an LLSO, but an instrument extended to 44 calibers, based on the LLSO, with an expansion of the range of ammunition.
      Quote: Sahalinets
      Campaign on the development of automatic 45-graph paper put the final cross. It's a pity. It would be an ideal weapon BMP, better than any foreign.

      If there was development, then it means sooner or later to appear.
      30 mm gun, for single shots, ineffective. A burst of fire is expensive (it’s only suitable for aviation and local air defense).
      1. Sahalinets 24 June 2020 12: 02 New
        • 2
        • 0
        +2
        If there was development, then it means sooner or later to appear.

        Alas, they covered for a long time. Could not telescopic cartridges.
      2. psiho117 25 June 2020 21: 59 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        Quote: Genry
        If there was development, then it means sooner or later to appear

        As Rogozin was shown in 2011, that's all, deaf. She fired herself at the firing range, and the developers reported bravely - "everything is fine."
        Then op, and everything disappeared somewhere.
        And silence...
        Mystic! request
  • bk0010 24 June 2020 13: 16 New
    • 3
    • 1
    +2
    There was a great option with a module of 100 mm + 30 mm. Tighten to him external ATGMs and it would be great. Why did 57 mm need to be made and even low ballistics?
  • Kolin 24 June 2020 15: 31 New
    • 2
    • 2
    0
    Dear minusers, here's the BOPS.
    1. Lopatov 24 June 2020 19: 17 New
      • 4
      • 0
      +4
      Quote: Kolin
      here's the BOPS.

      And here is the ammunition for LShO-57

      As you can see, nothing similar.
      1. Kolin 25 June 2020 10: 05 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        The diameter and length of the shots are the same.
    2. seos 25 June 2020 13: 02 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      This BOPS from another gun!
      A shell for an LLL is nearby, a brass sleeve with a powder charge occupies 15% of the length of the shell.
      For LLLS there is a crushing Shrapnel Armor-piercing shell, similar to English with armor penetration of 60 mm of armor, regardless of its inclination. But with such ballistics it will be very difficult to hit the target.
      1. Kolin 25 June 2020 13: 46 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        On the stand with ammunition for the "Epoch" they put something not related to the "Epoch", but geometrically coinciding with the OFS shot to the 57 mm cannon?
        The owl cracked at one glance at the globe.
        1. Lopatov 25 June 2020 14: 28 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          Quote: Kolin
          The owl cracked at one glance at the globe.

          Rather, it will crack from BOPS with an initial speed in the region of 300-600 m / s
          1. Kolin 25 June 2020 15: 25 New
            • 0
            • 0
            0
            At the QF 6 pounder in WWII, with the same barrel length with APGB and a sub-caliber projectile weight of 1,46 kg, the initial speed was 1150 m / s and nothing cracked.
            1. Lopatov 25 June 2020 15: 29 New
              • 0
              • 0
              0
              Quote: Kolin
              At the QF 6 pounder in WWII, with the same barrel length with APGB and a sub-caliber projectile weight of 1,46 kg, the initial speed was 1150 m / s and nothing cracked.

              And the initial RP speed was 300 m / s? Or is it still 800?
              1. Kolin 25 June 2020 15: 41 New
                • 0
                • 1
                -1
                Quote: Spade
                And the initial RP speed was 300 m / s?

                The main thing climbs into the chamber, and the strength of the barrel can be considered from BOPS, and not from OFS. Let me remind you that in fragmentation to the 45 mm cannon the beginning. the speed is about 400 m / s, while the sub-caliber is more than 1000 m / s.
                1. Lopatov 25 June 2020 15: 45 New
                  • 0
                  • 0
                  0
                  Quote: Kolin
                  The main thing is climbing into the chamber, and the strength of the barrel

                  And here is the "trunk strength"?
                  Automation guns.
                  Will not work on low-pulse munitions. if you count on working with BOPS.
                  Or it will collapse when firing with BOPS, if they are designed to use OF.

                  Quote: Kolin
                  Let me remind you that the fragmentation to the 45 mm gun

                  Is it automatic?
  • dgonni 24 June 2020 16: 31 New
    • 2
    • 2
    0
    With such ballistics, these 57mm are not needed. It is like a saying goes out of the village, but did not reach the city. Thunder in caliber 73mm did not teach anything to see. On objections like there is a smoothbore and almost the principle of RPGs, they do not roll. For other times, other requirements.
    And if 30mm having a flat trajectory and excellent penetration, maybe in the window a brick wall for 2 km and try to knock down a thread drone. That is a misunderstanding neither to the village nor to the city. It was necessary to put a cannon from the derivation and finish the normal ammunition with a programmable fuse, and not just what was pile on the Derivation. Then everything would fall into place, and it would not be necessary to re-equip the BMP before the ATGM.
    In general, there was a feeling that I blinded him from what was. But they did not ask how it would work and if it was necessary in this form.
    1. Lopatov 24 June 2020 19: 18 New
      • 5
      • 2
      +3
      Quote: dgonni
      With such ballistics, these 57mm are not needed.

      Really needed. Extremely needed.

      Quote: dgonni
      It was necessary to put the cannon from the derivation and finish the normal ammunition with a programmable fuse

      Like "why is it cheap, if expensive and with less efficiency?"
  • Saxahorse 24 June 2020 19: 48 New
    • 3
    • 1
    +2
    The article is interesting, but there remains a feeling of some kind of concrete razvodilov .. This module "Age" in general, where did it come from? There was a pretty decent Baikal module with a fairly serious 57 mm gun. And suddenly he was silently exchanged for some kind of miserable grenade launcher and habitually started screaming about having no analogue in the world ?? As an upgrade for BMP-2, well ... it might work. For the BMP-3, these are three big steps back compared to their magnificent 100 mm fluff, albeit low ballistics.

    And a special hello to fans of all sorts of pendants, like our new Ministry of Defense .. What a ridiculous fashion for rockets with a body kit from all sides? Look at the Syrian videos, at the battle machines pokotsali in deep scars and scratches! The external suspension of the missiles is just some kind of clowning .. Obviously, for a couple of hours of real battle. Only for the parade and for the most naive.

    But the retractable module "Bulat" solution is interesting and timely. For a long time, everyone has seen something now and again. Cornets for infantry use in battle. Tactically, it is usually justified, but for the price of course horror-horror. It’s high time to include a guided anti-personnel missile in the work.
    1. Lopatov 24 June 2020 20: 02 New
      • 4
      • 0
      +4
      Quote: Saxahorse
      There was a pretty decent Baikal module with a fairly serious 57 mm gun.

      And with microscopic BK, if you do not climb into the armored space
      Just compare the size of the ammunition
      1. Saxahorse 24 June 2020 20: 12 New
        • 0
        • 2
        -2
        Quote: Spade
        Just compare the size of the ammunition

        With 100 mm down BMP-3 size compare? I think you remember that I am very critical of the BMP-3 as a completely unsuccessful infantry fighting vehicle. But just her combat module is great! Decided to ditch the only advantage of the BMP-3 wretched combat module?
        1. Lopatov 24 June 2020 20: 17 New
          • 2
          • 0
          +2
          Quote: Saxahorse
          With 100 mm down BMP-3 size compare?

          Compare the S-60 shell and the LShO grenade

          BMP-3 is, of course, good. But the "triad" occupies a significant part of the reserved space. That means it can’t be put on modern Russian infantry fighting vehicles.

          Well, starting from scratch to create an analogue of the "Patria AMV" for the sake of installing the "triad" is a bust.
          1. Saxahorse 24 June 2020 20: 23 New
            • 1
            • 2
            -1
            Quote: Spade
            BMP-3 is, of course, good. But the "triad" occupies a significant part of the reserved space. That means it can’t be put on modern Russian infantry fighting vehicles.

            BMP-3 is certainly bad. However, its combat module is magnificent and the problems of its integration into an adequate infantry fighting vehicle were, as far as is known, resolved in the Kurgan "Dragoon".
            1. Lopatov 24 June 2020 20: 35 New
              • 2
              • 0
              +2
              Quote: Saxahorse
              However her combat module is great

              For installation on a tank base and use as a BMPT-maybe.
              For installation on a light tank, optionally carrying a small amount of infantry, it can be
              But not for BMP.
              1. Saxahorse 24 June 2020 20: 39 New
                • 1
                • 1
                0
                Quote: Spade
                For installation on a light tank, optionally carrying a small amount of infantry, it can be
                But not for BMP

                The first part is just BMP-3. And the second part has long been implemented by the Chinese on their ZBD-04. Note 16 years ago, moreover, on the basis of our combat module. The fact that we still have bread rolls and some sort of nonsense like "Terminators" are doing .. I don’t know who to ask ..
                1. Lopatov 24 June 2020 20: 45 New
                  • 1
                  • 0
                  +1
                  Quote: Saxahorse
                  The first part is just BMP-3.

                  The first part is Object 782

                  "Light tank" is just BMP-3.
            2. Lopatov 24 June 2020 20: 37 New
              • 3
              • 0
              +3
              Quote: Saxahorse
              as far as is known, they were resolved in an adequate BMP in the Kurgan "Dragoon".

              They didn’t decide. 6 people posted ok. The two will have to seep out. which will be very difficult
              1. Saxahorse 24 June 2020 20: 45 New
                • 1
                • 2
                -1
                Quote: Spade
                They didn’t decide. 6 people posted ok. The two will have to seep out. which will be very difficult

                In BMP-2, “leak” is assigned to the “senior shooter,” he climbs out through the bow hatch in battle. In BMP-3, the “landing” is entrusted to the entire landing, two under fire through the front hatches, the rest “somehow” through the engine compartment, in a groove just above the knees ..

                The Chinese have reduced the office to work in ZBD-04. And Chelyabinsk residents, by the way, offered to extend the chassis by one skating rink to accommodate all 10 people behind the tower.
                1. Lopatov 24 June 2020 20: 47 New
                  • 2
                  • 0
                  +2
                  Quote: Saxahorse
                  The Chinese have reduced the office to work in ZBD-04. And Chelyabinsk residents, by the way, offered to extend the chassis by one skating rink to accommodate all 10 people behind the tower.

                  Thrifty, damn it all .....
                  The toad will strangle two BMPs and have a normal large compartment ...

                  By the way, for the sake of fun, the Finns had to lengthen the “Patria AMV” by 40 centimeters in order to maintain the original number of paratroopers after installing the “triad”
                  1. Saxahorse 24 June 2020 20: 53 New
                    • 1
                    • 3
                    -2
                    Quote: Spade
                    Thrifty, damn it all .....

                    Thrifty is ours, I don’t know how to call them tolerant here ...

                    Having such a number of Soviet developments in the archives give out “to the mountain” Armata, Terminators and the like slag .. I don’t even know what to call it.

                    In fact, all potential opponents are already far ahead of us in the development of infantry fighting vehicles.
                    1. Lopatov 24 June 2020 21: 12 New
                      • 2
                      • 0
                      +2
                      Quote: Saxahorse
                      In fact, all potential opponents are already far ahead of us in the development of infantry fighting vehicles.

                      And who is there?
                      The Germans and the Swedes, like that.
                      The rest either save by installing a tower on wheeled armored personnel carriers, or si ... chest wrinkles, like the Americans with the British
                      1. Saxahorse 24 June 2020 22: 32 New
                        • 1
                        • 3
                        -2
                        Quote: Spade
                        The Germans and the Swedes, like that.

                        The Germans are more than enough. Who else in Europe knows how to fight besides them? Well, our Chinese friends are also slightly worried. They also have long been not only numerical, but also a real technical advantage. God forbid we quarrel ..
                      2. psiho117 25 June 2020 22: 35 New
                        • 0
                        • 0
                        0
                        Quote: Saxahorse
                        Who else in Europe knows how to fight besides them?

                        The French, oddly enough. The fact that they just got laid during WWII does not make them bad warriors. And the technical equipment of the French army and navy is better than the Germans, as if not at times.
                        The Britons, with their pocket highlanders, are also good fighters.
                        Swiss, again.
      2. Cympak 25 June 2020 03: 16 New
        • 1
        • 1
        0
        One of the voiced claims to the BMP-3 triad is that it cannot effectively crush enemy infantry with continuous fire: a 100-mm gun has a long reload time, and a 30-mm gun has low efficiency with regard to covered infantry.
        Here is the solution from the KBP (and not from the CRI Burevestnik, as erroneously stated in the article) - an automatic 57-mm gun with low ballistics and a powerful grenade to combat sheltered infantry.
        In addition, the KBP was able to ensure the operation of the gun automation simultaneously with the BPS, which has a significantly larger propellant charge and therefore recoil.
        1. Lopatov 25 June 2020 09: 24 New
          • 1
          • 0
          +1
          Quote: Cympak
          that it cannot effectively crush enemy infantry with continuous fire:

          "Continuous fire" no one can push.
          The “triad” has the most mantle - anti-tank capabilities, it requires normal ATGMs launched from the TPK.

          Quote: Cympak
          In addition, the KBP was able to ensure the operation of the gun automation simultaneously with the BPS

          I'm afraid this is something wrong.
          And the anti-tank capabilities of LSE are limited to this:
  • psiho117 25 June 2020 22: 17 New
    • 2
    • 0
    +2
    Quote: Saxahorse
    This module "Age" in general, where did it come from?

    This combat module is the latest development of Gryazev-Shipunov, the very concept of “57mm low ballistics + a heavy rocket in the dimensions of a Cornet + a block of light rockets” was invented by Gryazev, and after their death KBP already brought it all to the finished module.
    So do not la la, these men did not drive bullshit.
    And the 57mm anti-aircraft gun is a competitive development, and, frankly, unsuccessful - as the main armament of the BMP. Here for BMPT would fit perfectly.

    By the way, APGB ammunition - 180 shells (not counting those in the receiving arm). Accordingly, 63 BPS and 117 OFS
  • Zaurbek 25 June 2020 08: 25 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Bulat missile system is offered as an addition to the Cornet
    They would have told about this device .... otherwise he came from nowhere and they don’t write about it anywhere.
    1. Lopatov 25 June 2020 09: 25 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      Apparently the same as the Cornet, but with a lighter warhead and a lighter engine.
      Accordingly, the laser beam, like the "Cornet" and "Attack"
      1. Zaurbek 25 June 2020 11: 39 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        And range, penetration, caliber? Which bch? Why only on one module?
  • 5-9
    5-9 25 June 2020 13: 25 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    I like the LShO-57 option and Bulat also likes it ... the question is how much the BC with a short sleeve will increase, because the old 57-mm to long 57-mm guns in size as 100 mm to the BMP-3 gun and for conventional BMP are redundant for today.
    Our 30-mm is almost nothing of the partner BPM does not take forehead, new models with it is no longer worth doing.
    1. psiho117 25 June 2020 22: 29 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      Quote: 5-9
      how much BC with a short sleeve will increase,

      APGB ammunition - 180 shells (not counting those in the receiving arm). Accordingly, 63 BPS and 117 OFS
  • Tuzik 25 June 2020 18: 41 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    the smooth-bore should be developed of medium caliber, 60-90 mm, with the possibility of launching small missiles, and this shotgun ... it would be better if the cornflower was entered
  • John22 25 June 2020 18: 46 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    It’s stupid to worsen ballistics and the shell of an existing gun.