Military Review

The smoke of the fatherland. What is the future for Boomerang?

120

Russian "Striker"



The K-24 infantry fighting vehicle returning from the Victory Day parade on June 17 stopped at the intersection of Mnevniki and Demyan Bednogo streets in the North-Western district of the capital, after which smoke poured out of it. Many media outlets decided to use the awesome word “caught fire” in the title of the articles or the phrase “out of order”. In fact, of course, the reasons for what happened could be very different.

Specialist in the armored sphere Alexei Khlopotov noted that the cause of what happened could be an abnormal operation of thermal smoke equipment - a device for setting smoke screens. “As a rule, the principle of its operation is the direct injection of diesel fuel into the hot exhaust pipe of the engine with a lack of oxygen,” the expert wrote, adding that he does not exclude the possibility of depressurization or breakage of the pipeline connection.

It is unlikely that an incident will entail a review of the program, but he once again recalled that the completion of new equipment is a long and painstaking process. Wheel platform "Boomerang" - not an exception in any way. Moreover, for Russia the machine is revolutionary in many respects: previously, the country's armament simply did not have wheeled complexes comparable in armament and defense.

With the world in a thread


Recall that for the first time the car was presented at a private display at the Russia Arms EXPO in 2013, and the general public was able to see the platform at the rehearsal of the Victory Parade in 2015. As in the case of "Armata" and "Kurganets-25", we are not talking about a specific model of armored vehicles, but about a whole family of military vehicles built on a single base. On the basis of the Boomerang, the K-17 infantry fighting vehicle and the K-16 armored personnel carrier have already been developed. In the basic version of the BMP K-17 has a combat module "Age", also known as "Boomerang-BM." He received a 30mm 2A42 automatic cannon with a coaxial 7,62mm PKTM machine gun and four Kornet anti-tank missiles with laser guidance.


The latter can hardly be called a modern solution. Such systems do not fully ensure the principle of “shot-forgot,” they require illumination up to hitting the target, and they can unmask the one who fires, which ultimately can end badly for the Boomerang itself. However, there is nothing to choose from in this case: Russia, recall, still does not have its conditional counterpart FGM-148 Javelin, not to mention the new generation of anti-tank missiles, which, in addition to the “shot-forget” principle, have good range (Javelin cannot boast of this).

Of the advantages: "Epoch" or "Boomerang-BM" is unified for use not only on the BMP K-17, but also on the BMP B-11 on the basis of Kurganets-25 and the heavy T-15 on the basis of "Almaty". As for the promising armored personnel carrier based on the Boomerang, it should receive a module with a 12,7 mm machine gun. An armored personnel carrier can be called a “greatly reduced version”, but it’s more correct to say that infantry fighting vehicles and armored personnel carriers will play different roles on and off the battlefield.

Despite the relatively modest firepower, the differences between the new APCs and Soviet vehicles of this class are enormous: the only thing that unites them is the 8 x 8 wheel arrangement.

“Everything else is fundamentally different: the layout with the front position of the power plant, the troop compartment at the rear and the landing of the aft, modular reservations, a high level of mine and ballistic protection, a digital board, a situational awareness system, an onboard information-control system and much more. I’ll say this: no one has done such a thing in our country before, and many systems have no analogues also abroad, ”

- said in 2018 the head of the “Military-Industrial Company” Alexander Krasovitsky.


It is not surprising that the new vehicles will be very different from Soviet infantry fighting vehicles and armored personnel carriers: the time of the latter has passed due to objective reasons. What really surprises is an attempt to cross a bulldog with a rhino.

Recall that in 2017, the Army 2017 forum demonstrated the capabilities of the Boomerang platform with the Berezhok manned combat module B05Y01 instead of the uninhabited Epoch. The Berezhok B05Y01 armament complex includes a 30mm 2A42 automatic cannon, a 7,62mm PKTM machine gun, 30mm AG-30 automatic grenade launcher and Kornet guided missiles. The same is installed on BMP-2M infantry fighting vehicles.


It is not clear why the choice fell on this "original" option. The simplest explanation: this is an attempt to make the complex cheaper by abandoning the advantages (in particular, survivability) that an uninhabited module can provide. However, was it worth it then to invest in such an expensive project in order to eventually return to the economy of the 90s? In any case, at the parade we saw a car with the Epoch module: we must assume that this is the main option.

"Boomerang" - to be?


State tests of the promising Boomerang platform will begin before the end of 2020. This was announced in June 2020 by the Director General of "VPK" Alexander Krasovitsky. After their completion, serial deliveries of military vehicles to the troops should begin. According to the designer, as a result of the growing dynamics of modern local conflicts, highly mobile models are needed, therefore, in addition to armored personnel carriers, infantry fighting vehicles, reconnaissance armored vehicles and an armored repair and recovery vehicle, in the future they can create a wheeled tank with a gun similar to a 125-mm 2A75 based on the Boomerang. mounted on the tracked "Octopus-SD". An analogy with the famous Italian Centauro combat vehicle, sometimes called the “fighter,” also suggests itself. tanks».

However, given the already huge diversity in the Russian army of the main battle tanks and their versions, this option seems completely unnecessary and even “harmful” in terms of unification. Which, of course, does not mean at all that the army does not need the Boomerang platform itself.


If the concept of “Kurganets-25” intersects with the concept of “Almaty” (although they are in different weight categories), then Russia simply does not have a comparable protection analogue of “Boomerang”. Do not forget that after the well-known events, the country can no longer count on the purchase of such samples in the West. So the hope is only in their own strength.

It is also obvious that, as we said above, the era of Soviet armored personnel carriers is leaving. In the new century, there is no place for combat vehicles with low armor protection and a completely unsatisfactory landing and landing scheme using side doors, in which soldiers are not protected by armor and constantly risk their lives. It is noteworthy that Ukrainian developers, not having much money and experience in creating modern equipment, solved this issue at the BTR-4 “Bucephalus”: we recall that it has a stern ramp, which the Russian BTR is sorely lacking. However, this does not remove the issue of survivability of the machine itself, and, besides this, “Bucephalus” has such a large number of flaws that the big question is whether it can even be considered as a full-fledged combat vehicle.

Simply put, neither "childhood illnesses", nor technical flaws like the high visibility of the machine in the infrared spectrum are likely to "kill" the new Russian project, and its main drawbacks will be gradually eliminated.
Author:
120 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Sahalinets
    Sahalinets 29 June 2020 05: 31
    30
    Replacing our infantry fighting vehicles and armored personnel carriers is long overdue. And the best argument is the behavior of the users of this technique themselves, who prefer to sit on top. And this is not surprising when you consider that this equipment is conditionally armored, and in fact it makes its way into the side even with a burst of PKM!
    I am silent about ergonomics. I had to ride in the BTR-80 and the BMP-2 ... the feeling that the designers simply did not think about what the landing would be like. Ah, they can handle it somehow! The cars are terribly cramped, it's hard to even say which one is worse. You sit crooked and squeezed, especially when you consider that there is also a bunch of property stuffed there. Only the lazy did not write about the inconvenience of leaving our armored personnel carriers, but the BMP was not much better. To make his way crawling halfway to the low doors, and even divided by a partition ... So our boys ride on horseback, knowing full well that inside they will be in a trap from which you will not quickly jump out ...
    I think that in this case it would be better to ride in some armored onboard Urals. There would be a review, and space, and the ability to shoot from a car, having at least some protection in the form of an armored side, well, and leave it in a couple of seconds.
    The argument about the excessive height of the new technology is ridiculous. With modern weapons and sights, half a meter above and below do not play a role. That's just how many these promises have already been about updating the technology, but things are still there! I’m afraid that even in ten years our infantry will ride on junk, except that they’ll put some Berezhok ...
    1. Flamberg
      Flamberg 29 June 2020 05: 57
      11
      I think that in this case it would be better to ride in some armored onboard Urals. There would be a review, and space, and the ability to shoot from a car, having at least some protection in the form of an armored side, well, and leave it in a couple of seconds.

      Do not forget that all Soviet equipment was manufactured with an eye on a nuclear meat grinder and tight equipment was required.
      And you still forgot that the Soviet armored personnel carriers and infantry fighting vehicles have protection against mines and explosives below the baseboard.
      1. Sahalinets
        Sahalinets 29 June 2020 06: 01
        10
        Yes, the shortcomings can be listed for a long time, but I wrote a comment, not an article. I did not manage to experience a mine explosion, fortunately, but I remember how a landing force in an infantry fighting vehicle flies when riding on any slightly rough surface.
      2. venik
        venik 29 June 2020 09: 00
        +3
        Quote: Flamberg
        And you still forgot that the Soviet armored personnel carriers and infantry fighting vehicles have protection against mines and explosives below the baseboard.

        =======
        I’ll tell you even more: GOST in terms of resistance to undermining, we simply no! On ballistic protection - there is (TOST R 50744-95R; 50963-96R and P 51136-2008) - and on mine protection - NO!!! Here are the designers and are forced to focus on NATO-STANAG ......
      3. Civil
        Civil 29 June 2020 10: 57
        0
        The technique is not serial yet, everything is in trial operation.
    2. lucul
      lucul 29 June 2020 06: 34
      +4
      I had to ride in the BTR-80 and the BMP-2 ... the feeling that the designers simply did not think about what the landing would be like. Ah, they can handle it somehow! The cars are terribly cramped, it's hard to even say which one is worse. Sitting twisted and pinched

      When they were designed, the average height of a person was taken for 165 cm, and now the average height is already from 180 cm ....
      1. neri73-r
        neri73-r 29 June 2020 11: 23
        -2
        Quote: lucul
        When they were designed, the average height of a person was taken for 165 cm, and now the average height is already from 180 cm ....

        McDonald's, fast food wassat kids grow up and are not shy that the average weight is not 70 kg, but 100 already.
      2. psiho117
        psiho117 29 June 2020 12: 31
        +3
        Quote: lucul
        When they were designed, the average height of a person was taken for 165 cm
        Oh well, people are all different, then and now. I’m not at all sure that they did any research of medium height, or the convenience of landing and disembarking in combat conditions, and I don’t know what kind of dusk they had in their heads when they developed this tin. Instead of doors - fuel tanks, it had to be thought out!
        Interestingly, the designers would like their son, for example, to participate in such an pepelats? Or were they completely divorced from reality?
        Quote: lucul
        Now the average height is already from 180 cm

        You bent it! I’m driving a small one to school - on the contrary, I notice that high school students are now somehow smaller. When I was studying, we had such moose that you could immediately take in the Airborne Forces.
        That week I was at the graduation party - there are none, all of medium height, the guys are generally half small, a head taller than the girls.
        1. Simargl
          Simargl 30 June 2020 07: 23
          0
          Quote: psiho117
          I’m not at all sure that they conducted any studies of medium height
          It is constantly monitored. A mechanic in a tank from 170 cm will feel so-so. YES take the "classics", "loaf" ... but there is nothing for a tall man to do ...
        2. Usher
          Usher 30 June 2020 12: 11
          -1
          Instead of doors - fuel tanks, it had to be thought out!
          and what? Fuel is good protection. Do you think it’s just going to catch fire? Have you tried setting fire to diesel fuel or a solarium?
          1. psiho117
            psiho117 30 June 2020 21: 05
            0
            Quote: Usher
            fuel is good protection

            In theory. From Cumulative. From BZT, with half-empty tanks - no.
            Do you think it’s just going to catch fire?

            Practice shows - what lights up, and how. The number of "kopecks" burned in Afghanistan and Chechnya is proof of this.
    3. Elturisto
      Elturisto 29 June 2020 14: 14
      -10 qualifying.
      Spoon then tie an expert from the Institute of Sofa Sciences.
      The main problem of all modern sheds for parades is the placement of the landing sideways in the direction of travel as well as poor longitudinal balancing due to the front location of the MTO.In BMP-3 this problem is solved, while an unprecedented level of firepower is achieved while maintaining buoyancy and air mobility.
      1. Blackgrifon
        Blackgrifon 29 June 2020 15: 07
        16
        Yeah. Allowed: 100 mm landmines and troops were crammed into one compartment and gave them super convenient hatches for landing. The three have two indisputable advantages: firepower and good armor. But as a machine for transporting l / s, it is not very convenient.
        At the same time, it is impossible to fend off the arguments of Sahalinets: the insane ergonomics according to the principle of "endure and overcome" in the BTR-60/70/80/82 and in the BMP-1/2/3 is a fact that only a person can argue with. did not sit.
        1. Elturisto
          Elturisto 29 June 2020 21: 27
          -7
          From haifa you know better, at least enough for matzo?
          1. Blackgrifon
            Blackgrifon 29 June 2020 22: 19
            +5
            Not ham, boy :) And go cry on the Jews in another place :))
    4. pereselenec
      pereselenec 29 June 2020 17: 27
      -2
      Quote: Sahalinets
      I’m afraid that even in ten years our infantry will ride on junk, except that they’ll put some Berezhok ...

      It is believed that they will ride this way until 2036 laughing
    5. tank-master
      tank-master 29 June 2020 22: 59
      +1
      BTR-80 and BMP-2 were created according to the requirements and standards that were adopted then ... according to RE-80 ... so ... no complaints .. these were the requirements.
  2. The leader of the Redskins
    The leader of the Redskins 29 June 2020 06: 19
    +2
    This year's unfortunate incident, unfortunately, shows a growing lack of culture in society. After all, these incidents occur not only in Moscow, but also in Kiev, in Minsk, and if you dig in meticulously, then over the hill.
    Why did I mention lack of culture?
    Because, as A. A. Chekhov wrote:
    "An uncultured person is not the one who spilled the sauce, but the one who attached importance to it, jumped up, started talking loudly about it, poking a finger" ...
    Maybe not verbatim, but so.
    Let's not give such annoying little things such deep attention. Technique all the same. And it’s peculiar to break ...
    It seems to me that if we do not "poke" at the neighbors, then such annoying little things will pass with less attention)))
    1. GTYCBJYTH2021
      GTYCBJYTH2021 29 June 2020 06: 39
      -3
      They said culturally to themselves ...... Chekhov was mentioned ...
      1. The leader of the Redskins
        The leader of the Redskins 29 June 2020 06: 44
        13
        Yes exactly, mentioning ... Through "e" ....
        1. Kote Pan Kokhanka
          Kote Pan Kokhanka 29 June 2020 07: 17
          16
          Technique all the same. And it’s peculiar to break ...

          God give me a memory. At parades on Red Square in the 30 goals of the last century, the wheels of the carts fell off more than once or twice !!! laughing
          I'll add from myself! During combat training, a solemn march, especially with the participation of the beautiful half of humanity, is marked on the parade ground (shoes, heels and other jewelry). The French in the 95th in general, something wheeled in the parade burned down, and in the 97th they cut off all the electronics on the praised Leclercs to avoid excesses!
          So all this is trifles !!!
          1. Hagen
            Hagen 29 June 2020 12: 48
            +1
            Quote: Kote pane Kohanka
            At parades on Red Square in the 30 goals of the last century, the wheels of the carts fell off more than once or twice !!!

            As far as I remember, at least a couple of duty trucks (something like a SU-100 without a gun, the place of the gun was welded with a steel plate) on both ends of the stands near the wall was on duty at the parade on Red Square during the parade. During the ceremonial trainings for the crews of the tractors, training was also conducted on the evacuation of stalled equipment. They told a case that once during a parade the engine of a tank stalled, but M-v did not lose his head and managed to get the tank out of the column at the starter. For which he almost received the "Red Star".
            1. tank-master
              tank-master 29 June 2020 22: 57
              +1
              These were vehicles based on SU-122-54, specially redone ... and they were called “TOP”
              https://miniart-models.com/ru/products/37038-top-armoured-recovery-vehicle/
    2. venik
      venik 29 June 2020 09: 17
      +1
      Quote: Leader of the Redskins
      "An uncultured person is not the one who spilled the sauce, but the one who attached importance to it, jumped up, started talking loudly about it, poking a finger" ...

      Quote: Leader of the Redskins
      Let's not give such annoying little things such deep attention. Technique all the same. And it’s peculiar to break ...

      ========
      The difference between spilled sauce and "broken off" military equipment (especially those prepared for the Parade) is precisely that "spilled sauce" is misunderstanding (and no more), and a faulty technique is a reason to think and draw the right conclusions (on improving the reliability of the design, build quality and the level of training of technical personnel)!
      The difference catch?
      --------
      Quote: Leader of the Redskins
      It seems to me that if we do not "poke" at the neighbors, then such annoying little things will pass with less attention

      ========
      This is NOT Trivial, dear! This is not at all trifles: from such incidents and add up very serious incidents!
      1. The leader of the Redskins
        The leader of the Redskins 29 June 2020 09: 32
        18
        Sorry, I'm a mechanical engineer by training. There is such a chance of failure as a Monte Carlo. This is taught at the institute. Unpredictable like roulette. You can know the mechanism 100%, check everything three times, top up and adjust. But you cannot guarantee that this particular hydraulic hose taken (from the same supplier) did not turn out to be slightly defective, or that everything is in accordance with the documents, but a batch of metal from which the bolt is made, with the minimum allowable content of the ligating element! You did everything right, but ... The car broke down. Yes, then they will draw conclusions and find the culprit, but at the time of the breakdown, YOU did everything for "five,"!
        1. BARKHAN
          BARKHAN 29 June 2020 10: 08
          +9
          Quote: Leader of the Redskins
          Sorry, I'm a mechanical engineer by training. There is such a chance of failure as a Monte Carlo. This is taught at the institute. Unpredictable like roulette. You can know the mechanism 100%, check everything three times, top up and adjust. But you cannot guarantee that this particular hydraulic hose taken (from the same supplier) did not turn out to be slightly defective, or that everything is in accordance with the documents, but a batch of metal from which the bolt is made, with the minimum allowable content of the ligating element! You did everything right, but ... The car broke down. Yes, then they will draw conclusions and find the culprit, but at the time of the breakdown, YOU did everything for "five,"!

          My plus. So it is. Notice the same story with weapons and ammunition. There may be a misfire even from new zinc. Optics may float or the nightlight could die at the most crucial moment. As well as communication will be lost, poor quality fuel will get caught, an experienced engineer will make mistakes, overlook a good commander ... This is life.
          The army is a permanent lack of something and eternal improvisation.
          1. Petrik66
            Petrik66 30 June 2020 09: 59
            +6
            And then there is the "general effect". I remember very well how the colonel general from the paradise group decided to look at our station, and she, having previously worked through a mountain of time, passed out simultaneously with the landing of the general's ass on the seat. I was almost "shot" by the fathers of the commanders ........ in a couple of minutes the station started working, but the impression remained.)))))
        2. alexmach
          alexmach 29 June 2020 12: 37
          -5
          Sorry, I'm a mechanical engineer by training

          Ok, then as a mechanical engineer, tell me what should be the time between failures of military equipment? It is clear that any event can happen with a certain probability, but nevertheless what is indicated by the refusal of one of a dozen armored personnel carriers, which only needed a couple of dozens of KMs to travel in formation, and which they had to prepare for the parade? And how will such a technique behave in real field tests if it fails at the parade?
          1. The leader of the Redskins
            The leader of the Redskins 29 June 2020 13: 07
            +9
            I pointed out to you a method that excludes the concepts of operating time or neglect. On experimental technology, failures in operating time can only be theoretical, laid down by the designers.
            1. alexmach
              alexmach 29 June 2020 13: 11
              -7
              I pointed out to you a method that excludes the concepts of operating time or neglect

              M .. you indicated a non-working method .. about which you wrote in the Comment.
              1. Simargl
                Simargl 30 June 2020 07: 36
                +2
                Quote: alexmach
                You specified the idle method ..
                Working. You seem to have a technique for ... "it works by itself" ...
                1. alexmach
                  alexmach 30 June 2020 09: 46
                  -3
                  You seem to have a technique for ... "it works by itself" ...

                  to me to you, to forum "specialists" who can not master one comment. Let me ask you, if he is working, why did he smoke then?
                  1. Simargl
                    Simargl 1 July 2020 06: 40
                    +1
                    Quote: alexmach
                    Let me ask, if he is working, why did he smoke then?
                    If you are alive - why are you getting worse and worse?
                    They explained the reasons for the breakdowns, but because of your abilities, you ask the same question.
                    So I conclude that you understand the level of technology
                    Quote: Simargl
                    "it works by itself"
                    1. alexmach
                      alexmach 1 July 2020 10: 46
                      -1
                      But I know a little bit about math statistics. I will say right away, as it is written above, one single case in the parade is actually not enough to reliably judge the reliability of the machine, but nevertheless, if this miracle of technology smokes after the parade, then if used in real combat conditions, it is likely that half of them "will die" just on the way to the war and the other simply will not leave the boxes. And this is not a technique, it is still a "concept prototype". After all those years in development.
                      1. Simargl
                        Simargl 1 July 2020 18: 02
                        0
                        Quote: alexmach
                        I’ll say right away, as it is written above that one single case at the parade is actually not enough to reliably judge the reliability of the machine,
                        How does it fit with
                        Quote: alexmach
                        but still, if this miracle of technology smokes after the parade, then if used in real combat conditions, there is a possibility that half of them will "die" just on the way to war and the other simply will not leave the boxes.
                        And then with that
                        Quote: alexmach
                        this is not a technique, it is still a "concept prototype".
                        Surprise me.
                        It seems to me that your knowledge of mathematical statistics is close to the "average temperature in the hospital." Why? You just don't know where the data comes from.
                      2. alexmach
                        alexmach 1 July 2020 18: 25
                        -1
                        How does it fit with

                        I immediately said that discussing this with statistical reliability of the data is not enough, and most likely there will never be statistically reliable data in open sources. What further is written purely my IMHO by eye.
                        You just don't know where the data comes from.

                        From the nightstand? what's the difference where they come from? Only their quantity matters, and the quality aka representativeness of the sample for the current task. Where to come from? Yes, even from a camel, even from tests, even from military exploitation, even by crumbs from open sources.
          2. alexmach
            alexmach 30 June 2020 11: 29
            0
            On experimental technology, failures in operating time can only be theoretical, laid down by the designers.

            After reading it again, I agree. Yes, one case and that little party of Boomerangs that there is not enough to say anything about MTBF. But the case shows that the technique is still crude and not modified, so far. These are the very "childhood diseases" that are coming.
            1. The leader of the Redskins
              The leader of the Redskins 30 June 2020 11: 33
              +1
              Yes, which will, as needed, (if launched into a series) be cured.
  • rocket757
    rocket757 29 June 2020 06: 44
    +4
    The trend, the condition is mandatory, the equipment should provide increased protection for the crew, the landing .... here it is unacceptable to save.
  • Per se.
    Per se. 29 June 2020 07: 08
    +2
    It is not surprising that the new vehicles will be very different from the Soviet infantry fighting vehicles and armored personnel carriers: the time of the latter has passed due to objective reasons.
    Yes, there is no Soviet Union, that's for sure. That's just what this is made for "Russian "Striker" ", ride with the tanks in the attack?
    It is unlikely that the only arrangement where it is justified is the escort of military convoys, and preferably empty, since, again, an explosive bomb on a landmine or mine, since the armament control department of this monster takes up no less space than the classic fighting compartments in the tank. Is it really free for a landing?

    Generally, MRAP technology (English mine resistant ambush protected, protected from undermining and attacks from ambushes, a low-impact ambushproof) enhances protection against undermining, but inevitably increases the overall dimensions and height, substituting the side, making the car more vulnerable along the contour of the target.
    So it turns out that such a two-story "armored bus" is needed only as a police, anti-partisan vehicle. To what extent this is justified is another question. As for the "cramped" in the same BTR-80, so maybe it's time to reconsider the number of troops inside, in fact, what kind of vehicles would have to be made if the infantry squad was not 12 people, but 15-16? ... In the end , there are on-board vehicles for the mass transfer of manpower, and combat vehicles must be specialized for combat, and optimized in case of defeat with a landing party inside, where 12-13 people are already too much.
    1. Sahalinets
      Sahalinets 29 June 2020 07: 26
      11
      And what kind of war are you going to wage? World War III with tank attacks by lava and motorized infantry nearby? Something is doubtful. RA conducts completely different wars and there, as needed, a protected armored personnel carrier. Moreover, weapons can be cut. Enough of 12,7 + grenade launcher.
      And yes, the pictures are dubious. In the first picture, a car without a roof and a head sticks out. Put a roof and the difference will be very small.
      1. Per se.
        Per se. 29 June 2020 07: 55
        -1
        Quote: Sahalinets
        And what kind of war are you going to wage?
        It is not for me to decide, and, even, not to many of our generals, according to the "experience in Syria", where there is a specific geographic environment, terrorist fighters, in many ways using partisan tactics and not having many types of troops. Isn't that clear? Russia is being lied on from all sides, but we have all the concepts of anti-terrorist operations. Do you rule out an attack on Russia, or conflicts at the level of Khasan, Khalkin - Gol, even Damansky? Still the same doctrine of a compact army with anti-terrorist operations, the impossibility of a big war? Well, well ... As for the rest, I will not repeat what has already been said, in the end, we only express our personal opinion, which does not have to coincide.
        1. Sahalinets
          Sahalinets 29 June 2020 08: 01
          11
          And are you going to send our cardboard machines to attack a serious defense? Yes, the infantry prefers to walk on foot than it is guaranteed to burn out.
        2. venik
          venik 29 June 2020 09: 51
          +3
          Quote: Per se.
          Is it the same doctrine of a compact army with anti-terrorist operations, the impossibility of a major war? Oh well...

          ========
          And where have you seen the GREAT war with massive the use of heavy armored vehicles (in confined spaces)?
          The last such conflict ended in 1988 (Iran-Iraq war).
          And you talk about the "vicious doctrine" ...... Well, well!
          1. dauria
            dauria 29 June 2020 11: 26
            +1
            And where in recent decades have you seen the GREAT war with the massive use of heavy armored vehicles (in limited spaces)?


            Have you ever wondered why there wasn’t this BIG war? Is it only because of missiles with nuclear weapons? No, precisely because the land army was attached to these missiles with tanks and infantry fighting vehicles, capable of reaching Europe through the luminous Europe from radiation, by Biscay in a couple of weeks from the German Democratic Republic and dramatically changing the post-war picture. Having made senseless the very beginning of the war by the United States.
            Or in your scenarios after the exchange of nuclear weapons did the war immediately end?
            And these new toys should be sent to the Russian Guard or to the Africans - just right for them.
          2. psiho117
            psiho117 29 June 2020 12: 40
            +4
            Quote: venik
            where in recent decades have you seen the GREAT war with the massive use of heavy armored vehicles (in confined spaces

            Desert Storm. bully Whether to consider it "big" - I don't know, but "the massive use of heavy armored vehicles (in limited spaces" there was definitely. Plus support by engineering troops, forcing irrigation canals, etc.)
            1. venik
              venik 29 June 2020 19: 42
              -3
              Quote: psiho117
              urya in the desert. bully Whether to consider it "big" - I don't know, but "massive use of heavy armored vehicles (in confined spaces") was definitely there.

              ========
              Expected this comment. Immediately a question: WHAT do you consider "" the massive use of heavy armored vehicles in confined spaces "??? There (in Iraq) 1000 tanks converged on one field? 500? This definitely WAS NOT! Converged in battle (and then literally several times tank companies , mechanized battalions (30 - 50 vehicles each) ...... This is not a massive use! This is LOCAL battles!
          3. alexmach
            alexmach 29 June 2020 12: 46
            +5
            And where have you seen in recent decades

            I repeat once again, when designing equipment, we need to think not so much about the past decades, but about the future.
          4. Usher
            Usher 30 June 2020 12: 16
            -1
            Quote: venik
            Quote: Per se.
            Is it the same doctrine of a compact army with anti-terrorist operations, the impossibility of a major war? Oh well...

            ========
            And where have you seen the GREAT war with massive the use of heavy armored vehicles (in confined spaces)?
            The last such conflict ended in 1988 (Iran-Iraq war).
            And you talk about the "vicious doctrine" ...... Well, well!

            This does not deny her possibility. A total war is much more dangerous.
        3. IS-80_RVGK2
          IS-80_RVGK2 29 June 2020 11: 00
          +2
          Quote: Per se.
          All the same doctrine of a compact army with anti-terrorist operations

          Is it our tank armies deployed to fight terrorists? These are some very powerful terrorists just like Godzilla.
          1. Usher
            Usher 30 June 2020 12: 17
            -3
            It’s better to overdo it than overdo it.
      2. alexmach
        alexmach 29 June 2020 12: 45
        +1
        And what kind of war are you going to wage?

        Look. We are now using armored personnel carriers designed in the 60s. Wealthy Americans - whose technology is also at least 30-40 years old. The lines of combat vehicles are created for decades in advance, the types of threats during this time can change. Machines must be versatile. That is, it is suitable for a wide combined-arms conflict and for "special operations" against partisans. Is it possible and useful, or is it better to have separate types of equipment for different conflicts and what the main army armored personnel carrier should be, these are serious questions of military planning.
    2. Flamberg
      Flamberg 29 June 2020 07: 27
      +9
      So it turns out that such a two-story "armored bus" is needed only as a police, anti-partisan vehicle.

      And what's wrong with that? The last decades are conflicts, not wars. The classic Soviet armored personnel carriers and infantry fighting vehicles are completely unsuitable for them. I'm not saying that they are bad, just war and, accordingly, the concept of application has changed.
      As for the "cramped" in the same BTR-80, maybe it's time to reconsider the number of troops inside
      The problem is not in the number of troops, but in the height of the troop compartment. Of course I exaggerate, but when I happened to climb from the troop compartment of the armored personnel carrier to the place of the driver, it seemed that I barely touched the ceiling with my knees (my height is 185).
      1. Per se.
        Per se. 29 June 2020 07: 59
        +3
        Quote: Flamberg
        The last decades are conflicts, not wars.
        The last decades are coming to an end. If, for example, it is warm in summer, this does not mean that you do not need to have a fur coat for winter. To rivet the wrong technique, even worse, to create a vicious doctrine, it’s not even winter without a fur coat, later it will be justified that the “wrong” war began.
        1. donavi49
          donavi49 29 June 2020 08: 02
          10
          Well, that’s how the Yankees and hand grenade launchers were almost gone. Sense from the outline of the target, if all sorts of Spikes, Javelins, or even Parsis fly along the APCs ???
          1. Per se.
            Per se. 29 June 2020 08: 14
            -7
            Quote: donavi49
            Well, that’s how the Yankees and hand grenade launchers were almost gone.
            Maybe that's why they decided to clone our RPG-7?
            In the United States, a full-scale production of RPG-7 reusable hand-held anti-tank grenade launchers was developed, which were developed in the Soviet Union in the 60s of the last century and since then are the most popular type of hand grenade launchers in the world (Defense Aerospace reported this). The American version of the RPG-7 differs from its Russian counterpart only in that it has a stock from the M4 assault rifle, a pistol grip from the AR-15, and a Picatinny rail. With the advent of tandem grenade warheads, a very good thing.

            And, in any case, speaking of dimensions, it is easier to hit the "horse" than the "donkey".
            1. donavi49
              donavi49 29 June 2020 08: 21
              13
              This is a private company made if that. With an eye on export. They bought for the war in Afghanistan wherever they could. And in general, the use of RPGs in them has shifted to the defeat of stationary targets, such as a hut, in direct line of sight. For Javelin to sandal or to call an airplane is very expensive even for the Americans, plus Javelins such targets are poorly fixed and poorly hit.
            2. BAI
              BAI 29 June 2020 13: 12
              +1
              With the advent of tandem grenade warheads

              So they appeared a very long time ago. In 1988.
        2. Flamberg
          Flamberg 29 June 2020 08: 05
          +2
          In any case, the Boomerang must first be run in, and then it is up to him to decide whether it fits the doctrine or not.
      2. venik
        venik 29 June 2020 09: 40
        0
        Quote: Flamberg
        The classic Soviet armored personnel carriers and infantry fighting vehicles are completely unsuitable for them. I'm not saying that they are bad, just war and, accordingly, the concept of application has changed.

        =======
        good Max! The person probably just DOES NOT UNDERSTAND IT! Well, it doesn’t reach that, as the detection tools and tools evolve and improve defeats (when even conventional weapons in their effectiveness begin to approach low-power nuclear weapons), "Prokhorovka" - already not real! Try to concentrate a huge mass of tanks and armored vehicles in a small area - they will immediately "cover" - only "the feathers will fly"!
        And there are also conflicts of low intensity and semi-partisan wars that alas (!) Have become a reality and are happening more and more!
        =======
        Quote: Flamberg
        when I happened to climb from the troop compartment of the armored personnel carrier to the place of the mechanic’s drive, it seemed that I barely touched the ceiling with my knees (my height is 185).

        -------
        I sympathize drinks ! I have only 180 cm - and even then in the troop compartment I was sitting huddled "in three deaths" and the fire of designers (I will not say how - "they will be banned"!). Simply - Per se. (he is Sergey) - probably never sat in an armored personnel carrier! drinks soldier
        1. Per se.
          Per se. 29 June 2020 18: 13
          0
          Quote: venik
          Just Per Per. (aka Sergei) - probably never sat in the BTR-e!
          Here, he expressed his opinion on the topic, did not bother anyone ... Here you, "coalition", - "Fine, Gregory! Excellent, Constantine!", There is someone with whom and against whom to "be friends". We could venik (he is Vladimir) and ask me if they decided to comment on the comment with my personal opinion. I have not only sat in an APC many times, but also traveled, a specialist in wheeled vehicles, one of the army's knowledge and skills. For the first time, I had a chance to sit in an armored personnel carrier in 1980 (BTR-60PB). If you want to ride in the "Mouse", but for God's sake, your knees rested against the ceiling, - I sympathize, I have a height of 176, there were guys with me and over 180, nothing, one might say, not only sometimes slept, but also lived in armored personnel carriers, hawn them in their memories no one afterwards smeared them under the hee-hee. Good luck.
        2. Usher
          Usher 30 June 2020 12: 18
          -1
          "Prokhorovka" is no longer real!
          Who told you that? Who will cover? What is the Air Defense For?
      3. telobezumnoe
        telobezumnoe 14 August 2020 22: 43
        0
        yeah, but if you install another computer, modern communication means, put on all sorts of warriors, then in general there will be no place .. people do not understand what the armored personnel carrier is for, as if they are going to carry out offensive actions on it .. for this you need a different technique .. it is just a protected vehicle for the delivery of personnel, the main plus of its buoyancy, in contrast to armored KAMAZ vehicles, and for mobile headquarters as a command and staff vehicle, in addition to easy booking, it can swim .. at 80 it is simply not possible to accommodate everything that he needs to carry with him
    3. donavi49
      donavi49 29 June 2020 07: 58
      13
      height, substituting the side, making the car more vulnerable along the contour of the target.


      As the war in Syria showed, the use of RPGs in technology was sporadic and usually not very successful. A similar result was in the Donbass. The same BTR-4 (those still sheds) brought PGshki.

      The death of technology came from - ATGM, mines, other equipment. And in that order. Here the outline of the goal is not so important. If we take the war not against the broads with the anti-tank systems sent for utilization from the 80s, but against which country is 2 of the world. That’s where the target’s contour will be even less important, because Spikes, HJ-10 and other ATGM-3 generations (or 2 ++) fall into Toyota on the go.
      1. Per se.
        Per se. 29 June 2020 08: 44
        -2
        Quote: donavi49
        Here the outline of the goal is not so important.
        The outline of the goal is always important. The larger the machine, the greater the area you will have to somehow protect during the design, the weight will increase, respectively, the load on the chassis, on the engine (more powerful, more fuel consumption, less power reserve) and so on. I repeat that in addition to homing missiles there will also be ordinary artillery shells from gunners, and the same shooters with RPGs. Otherwise, it’s stupid to argue that it’s better to be rich, young and healthy than poor, sick and old ... Nevertheless, making an armored shed is easier than creating a well-balanced combat vehicle.
        1. donavi49
          donavi49 29 June 2020 09: 13
          10
          1) Conventional artillery shells will be from Leopards2A5-7 / M1A2SEP and other Leclerc. There, the outline of the target is also not important all of a sudden. Nobody will shoot at them from Rapier or RAC-43. Again, they don’t have guns either. And LNG, too, their variations were written off a long time ago.
          2) As for RPG shooters, I repeat, Syria and Donbass showed that RPGs shoot at stationary targets, such as a house. In technology, only from hopelessness or very situationally (and the result is not very).
          3) Well, you have to increase the reserve amount. The average height of men in Russia grew by 12 cm, and taking into account the prospects, all 17-20 should be laid. The number of bulk things that need to be placed has increased. Increased requirements for habitability and comfort.

          All, absolutely all new APCs in the world of the shed. To make Soviet-type armored personnel carriers, you need to have a very good substantiation and proof that everyone in the world is the one who develops the reincarnation of the Soviet armored personnel carrier Dartanyana.



          1. Per se.
            Per se. 29 June 2020 10: 53
            -10 qualifying.
            Quote: donavi49
            Everything, absolutely all new APCs in the world of sheds
            The best armored vehicles in the world were in the Soviet tank building school. I remember the time when they laughed at the American M-60 against our T-54 / T-55, and there was a reason. "Bradley" and "Warrior" were not perceived otherwise as freaks, "Stryker" - a barn.

            Yes, times are changing, the technology that was created by the "partners" for colonial policy and expeditionary tactics has become a "standard" of world quality and a "standard of progress". It was not in vain that Messrs. Popovkin and Postnikov doused everything Soviet with slop, advocating the purchase of foreign weapons. As I said, making a "barn" is easy, making a great car is difficult.

            The Chinese copy, the Anglo-Saxons did not know how to make good armored vehicles. But give the present youth comfort and invulnerability. Here, only, an armored personnel carrier or an infantry fighting vehicle is not a bomb shelter, and not an evening club with an air conditioner and a can of beer, you still have to get out to fight. In order to "make Soviet-type armored personnel carriers“first of all, talent is needed, and an understanding of who is the enemy of Russia and what threats it will have to face, in what wars or conflicts, in what types of combat this technique should be used and how.
            1. donavi49
              donavi49 29 June 2020 11: 03
              12
              If (or rather when) an APC from a picture hits a prikop in 15-20 kg - there will be 3-4 corpses and the rest will be seriously injured. If an APC of a modern type hits a similar dig, they will get rid of bruises.

              If TOU arrives in this APC, the result will be very unpleasant. If the TOU arrives in a modern-type armored personnel carrier, the result will also not be very good, but due to the larger volume, it will probably be possible to slightly reduce the number of heavy / dead + ceramics and more complicated reservations will not lead to a breach with the most severe damaging factor.
              1. Per se.
                Per se. 29 June 2020 11: 18
                -3
                Quote: donavi49
                If (or rather when) an armored personnel carrier from the picture runs into a prikopka in 15-20kg
                I have already said that it is necessary to single out police equipment and partisan tactics, and, fighting against a full-fledged army. What, in recent major conflicts and wars of two armies, did anyone bury landmines? This is done by terrorists, attacking army columns from ambushes. Secondly, be there any protection against undermining, no one in their right mind will go to attack the minefield in a real war.
                Quote: donavi49
                arrives TOU
                If TOW or Javelin arrives, it makes no difference, be it Stryker or Boomerang. In general, it is necessary to teach the soldiers to use their technique competently, then, where a pickup truck with a machine gun will be effective, and foolishly, it is known that you can break, destroy any car, especially since there is no equipment that cannot be destroyed.
            2. psiho117
              psiho117 29 June 2020 12: 56
              +7
              Quote: Per se.
              for the battle you still have to get out

              But you just forget that the battle is a maximum of 5-10% of the total operation time of the equipment in the unit (or even 0% - not everyone is "lucky" bully ).
              And all the main time - this is combat duty, patrol events, relocation back and forth, and other routine.
              And a combat vehicle should replace a motorized rifle house, in many cases.
              And not like with the "Soviet school" that you are praising - when a soldier can be driven under armor only by a direct order from a superior commander, and then - not for long. And the mechanics in general, grown by specialists are needed, militaristic.
              I have nothing against the Soviet design school regarding weapons, manufacturability, maintainability - but the attitude to the soldier there was just darkness.
              As if for unpretentious dwarf immortal biorobots developed ...
    4. Blackgrifon
      Blackgrifon 29 June 2020 14: 56
      +2
      Quote: Per se.
      So it turns out that such a two-story "armored bus" is needed only as a police, anti-partisan vehicle. To what extent this is justified is another question. As for the "cramped" in the same BTR-80, so maybe it's time to reconsider the number of troops inside, in fact, what kind of vehicles would have to be made if the infantry squad was not 12 people, but 15-16? ... In the end , there are on-board vehicles for the mass transfer of manpower, and combat vehicles must be specialized for combat, and optimized in case of defeat with a landing party inside, where 12-13 people are already too much.

      So, almost all conflicts of the XX - early XXI century are somehow accompanied by "police operations" - here and escort convoys with supplies, and raids on the rear, etc. - so it turns out that mines and ambushes are becoming one of the most dangerous and probable ways to slow down / slow down progress.
      For example, you can take the Border War between South Africa and Angola (as the most striking example of b / d between two equal in strength and equipment at that time opponents, coupled with active raids), the Arab-Israeli War (with Israeli raids on the rear of the Egyptians), the same thing can be said about the US campaign with Iraq, and even during WWII, light armored raids (or even just infantry on ordinary trucks, motorcycles and horses) in the rear and partisans were not uncommon.

      BTR-80 and so does not carry 10 troops, but only one compartment. And in general, modern infantry fighting vehicles and armored personnel carriers in many respects in terms of their technical characteristics have already merged into one class and are more focused on combat, while initially the functions of the armored personnel carrier (reconnaissance, transportation of military vehicles, combat without dismounting, rear protection, etc. ) more and more shifted to lighter and cheaper wheeled platforms.
    5. Aag
      Aag 30 June 2020 18: 05
      0
      You’re a plus from me. The argument below is there too the answers are ripe ... hi
    6. The comment was deleted.
  • Doccor18
    Doccor18 29 June 2020 07: 22
    +3
    The main minus of the new military equipment is the price. BTR - infantry fighting chariot. They need a lot. And they cost as much as a little - already expensive.
    1. Blackgrifon
      Blackgrifon 29 June 2020 15: 00
      +1
      So not only the cost of a unit question, but also in the resource. If the same armored personnel carrier and infantry at the front line carry, and escorted with cargo, then the resource is spent the same. The Yankees tried to solve this problem by riveting several thousand frauds, but in the end half of them (in particular, cars based on civilian cars) were forced to abandon.
    2. Aag
      Aag 30 June 2020 18: 48
      0
      Basically agree with you. Basically ...
      "The APC is an infantry war chariot."
      Not only. Strengthening of strongholds. Separate firing points. Under various conditions of combat arms and types of troops. Often, escort of columns. I will not, for now, argue about the conditions, say Syria, Afghanistan ... There are other situations. For example, escort of PGRK columns. (Yes, they showed, it was discussed, a new car commissioned by the Strategic Rocket Forces). I’ll probably not see it live (although in the Strategic Rocket Forces the volume of such equipment is much less than that of the Queen of the Fields ....
      We wrote above about the prices, the quality-quantity ratio. Everyone evaluates from their experience (I hope). And the choice of where to go: on armor, albeit frail, in the head of the column, or in the tent "Ural", STRONGLY depends on the situation ...
      According to the schemes above. In the BTR-70 (the 80th did not use), the landing party faces, barrels, and loopholes (!). Sometimes it’s also important ..
      More. Before faulting the Soviet armored personnel carriers, study the tasks that were in the air at that time. Air and sea landing ... The threat of a nuclear attack (in addition to the HLF, pressurization, cross-sectional area (midships) from different angles ....
      I will not dispute the need for new armored personnel carriers, the export potential (where, now without it), my requests (in the first place, they must be implemented).
      1. Aag
        Aag 30 June 2020 19: 01
        0
        Also, I forgot to mention. Mine protection. Building armor, angles IMHO, a story without end.
        EW! Against RU landmines, magnetic ... We have been fighting contact for a hundred years (with varying degrees of success) ....
        Not right, correct. But, such a monstrous gigantomania ...
        1. Aag
          Aag 30 June 2020 20: 50
          0
          Well, about habitability, comfort: "If you want to live, you will not grow so badly."
          "War is the case of the young" V. Tsoi.
          (They would have our experience, we would have their abilities!) - To cut down the landing (passenger capacity for 2-3 people), add an uninhabited turret, mine-protecting means, 2-4 PTR ... Dreams, dreams ...
          1. Aag
            Aag 30 June 2020 21: 09
            0
            There will be questions, I will try to answer, from my "bell tower" ...
  • GTYCBJYTH2021
    GTYCBJYTH2021 29 June 2020 07: 34
    -3
    Quote: Leader of the Redskins
    Yes exactly, mentioning ... Through "e" ....

    the sauce is why they spilled on themselves ........
  • prodi
    prodi 29 June 2020 08: 05
    -5
    Quote: Per se.
    So, just why was this "Russian Stryker" made, to ride along with the tanks in the attack?

    all this gigantomania - from the irrational desire to swim at all costs
    1. Ingvar 72
      Ingvar 72 29 June 2020 09: 04
      +2
      Why is it irrational? The idea of ​​making one universal machine is irrational.
      It is much easier to make two types of infantry fighting vehicles (APCs) for different tasks (concepts). And do not try to grasp the immensity.
      1. prodi
        prodi 29 June 2020 10: 17
        0
        probably they want it in the form of Kurganets - Boomerang in both versions each, but if buoyancy for a tracked vehicle can be rational, then for a 30t wheeled, four-axle, (not a break) - no
    2. psiho117
      psiho117 29 June 2020 13: 04
      0
      Quote: prodi
      from the irrational desire to swim at all costs

      why is it irrational - the modern spaced reservation will be voluminous in any way, otherwise one cannot defend oneself from the kuma.
      So why then suffer, we increase a little more, and hammer it with foamy filler - the machine is now both floating and more protected. Solid profit!
      1. prodi
        prodi 29 June 2020 15: 35
        0
        if earlier, for the sake of buoyancy, sacrificed security, now, having dispersed the size and weight, sacrificed patency
      2. prodi
        prodi 29 June 2020 17: 25
        0
        protection against cumulative for BTR-BMP is rational only for DZ or KAZ, because this is not a 30mm queue that will drill too many holes (in the sense there is no need to disperse the volume of the sides at all)
        1. Aag
          Aag 30 June 2020 19: 08
          0
          Money money.
          You need to decide on the tasks.
          IMHO: it is necessary both that, and another. Question of opportunities, and priorities ...
  • Private-K
    Private-K 29 June 2020 09: 14
    +5
    In the Russian Federation, as the heiress of the USSR-RSFSR, the following inhibitory factors were obtained in relation to wheeled armored personnel carriers.
    1. General temporary stagnation. Those. For too long, BTRs of one concept have been produced - BTR-60 (BTR-60PB, -70, -80). Moreover, even such machines as BTR-70 and BTR-80 began mass production several years after their development.
    2. Absolute dominating monopoly of the state corporation GAZ. The monopoly position of the only armored personnel carrier-producing provided her with the opportunity to impose her "point of view".
    3. 15 years that fell just during the "transition period" (from 1989 to 2004) when the transition to a new type of wheeled armored personnel carriers was to be carried out, Mayev was in charge of the case, who adhered to outdated views regarding the main parameters of BMP and armored personnel carriers, and categorically did not want to change anything to conceptual level.
    4. For the same period, there were difficult times for the USSR, and then the Russian Federation, when funds for development were simply not allocated. But precisely in this period - with ser. 80s to the beginning. 00-ies, in the West and there was a transition to new technologies and developed new concepts of wheeled BM.
    That's all this resulted in a catastrophic lag of the Russian Federation on wheeled BM to ser. 00s. It is not easy to overcome this business. It is necessary to develop (buy in the West, steal) new technologies, overcome obsolete regulatory provisions, educate a new generation of engineers who are able to work with new technologies, rebuild production, pour in and pour in loot (and watch so that they don’t take it away), etc., etc.
    That is why, at the initial stage (but even with the conclusion to "hardware"), the first Boomerangs were made ... by an "international" company in ... Ireland.
    1. Blackgrifon
      Blackgrifon 29 June 2020 15: 10
      +2
      Quote: Private-K
      That is why, at the initial stage (but even with the conclusion to "hardware"), the first Boomerangs were made ... by an "international" company in ... Ireland.

      This, by the way, was an April Fool’s joke. For the rest, you are right, although in the early 90s you still tried to do something good, despite the meager financing: the Urals made a real military mine-protected wheeled all-terrain vehicle for border guards (Khlopotov published an article about it relatively recently), and GAZ (although it continued rape BTR-60) made a good and modern BTR-90.
    2. Usher
      Usher 30 June 2020 12: 21
      -1
      Do not tell, huh !? What technology does an armored truck ??? You talk like a rocket.
  • Gvardeetz77
    Gvardeetz77 29 June 2020 09: 20
    +1
    The new thing is certainly good and even very necessary, but if on the "Boomer" the landing will be "on the armor" in full, full and even with a plus (i.e. not like in SA propaganda: only AK, gas mask and pouch
    with shops) ammunition to jump-fly from the second floor, then the fighters (not all, but the most "physically gifted", of whom more and more every year) will not go nuts when they land? Here and from the height of the old infantry fighting vehicles, armored personnel carriers, the spine fell into shorts and teeth flew out from the clack-clat ...
    Well, the side landing landing is not always evil, when firing on the march it’s much better to crawl out onto the unarmed side, but for armored personnel carriers there is just the greatest vulnerability on the marchs, they should not crawl into the attack ... Although, of course, poke doors from all sides , sacrifice the strength of the case ...
    1. The comment was deleted.
    2. Passing
      Passing 29 June 2020 16: 53
      +4
      Quote: Gvardeetz77
      Well, the side landing is not always evil

      So I was always struck by the thesis that the rear location of the door in the APC is an advantage. Obviously, in the domestic concept, an armored personnel carrier does not go on the attack, but carries people in columns, which means shelling will be from the side, not from the front, and it is better to have doors on both sides, but the rear door is already relevant for the BMP. Actually, it was implemented in Soviet technology. But no, we would be brainless to clone Western approaches, but to understand that the West does not plan to fight head-on with a strong enemy, and in this paradigm their armored personnel carrier is quite equivalent to our BMP, and is quite suitable for a frontal attack on the barmaley and therefore they need a back door. But the niche of our armored personnel carriers is occupied by MRIs, and, which is characteristic, the side doors on them are carefully preserved, despite the obvious anti-mine weakening of the case. Because they use their heads, not monkeys.
  • Hermit21
    Hermit21 29 June 2020 10: 05
    0
    So this, with "Berezhk" will be offered only for export
  • pytar
    pytar 29 June 2020 10: 14
    +1
    The Boomerang has some kind of problem with the engine, most likely with its exhaust system.




    In the infrared spectrum, this area of ​​the body shines like an oven!


    Overheating for some reason!
    1. Bad_gr
      Bad_gr 29 June 2020 16: 44
      +1
      I think in this place he has an exhaust pipe (above the first right wheel). The cooling system is a little further, on the upper part of the case (radiators, almost in the center and the hot air outlet on the right side of the case)
      1. pytar
        pytar 29 June 2020 17: 58
        0
        Yes! The problem is most likely in the exhaust pipes! Overheating is visible on infrared images! Strongly unmasking factor! Probably it is necessary to insulate, improve it.
  • moreman78
    moreman78 29 June 2020 10: 37
    +1
    [quote = Per se.] [quote] to review the number of troops inside, in fact, what kind of vehicles would have to be, if the infantry squad was not 12, but 15-16? ... In the end, there are airborne vehicles for mass transfer manpower, and combat vehicles should be specialized for combat, and optimized in case of defeat with the landing inside, where 12-13 people are already too much. [/ quote]
    And where is our branch of 12 people? Our motorized rifle unit = 8-9 people. And even for such a department (including equipment), all BTR-80 and BMP-1/2 are TEN
  • BAI
    BAI 29 June 2020 12: 58
    +2
    On the 24th, at 7 pm, after the parade, Shoigu told Zvezda how important it is that there is no emergency at the parade, they say, they are remembered.
    The incident, of course, was after the parade, but still it was. They didn’t correct this speech for him, didn’t know if the recording was previously made or what else? There are as many versions as there are explanations for the incident.
  • bars1
    bars1 29 June 2020 18: 53
    0
    As stated by the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation, the statement was due to oil getting into the exhaust manifold. The diesel turbine bearing was ripped off and 4 liters of oil leaked.
  • Alf
    Alf 29 June 2020 19: 33
    -1
    Do not forget that after the well-known events, the country can no longer count on the purchase of such samples in the West.

    What a tragedy ...
    So the hope is only in their own strength.

    And when was it different?
  • Bodipancher
    Bodipancher 29 June 2020 19: 52
    0
    Probably all the same, the division into infantry fire support vehicles (like the Terminator) and armored personnel carriers, where you can confine yourself to a 12.7 machine gun and an automatic grenade launcher, but with good capacity and ease of landing, will be optimal. Such a set of weapons will be enough to cover the infantry with fire during the landing or to evacuate the wounded and retire from the battlefield. For police and counterguerrilla operations is also enough, there is very heavy weapons are not needed.
  • Muddy Seeing ORACLE
    Muddy Seeing ORACLE 29 June 2020 19: 56
    0
    In the future, all in one
    1. Alf
      Alf 30 June 2020 19: 50
      +1
      Quote: Muddy-Seeing ORACLE
      In the future, all in one

      Not.

      laughing
  • Alien ...
    Alien ... 29 June 2020 20: 14
    +2
    ... Throwing, throwing ... And with Armata, and with the Coalition, and with BMP, and with armored personnel carriers ... Well, I agree that with a tank and BMP everything is very difficult to break through defense in the forehead. But with an APC, what problems? It used to be an SME attack on an armored personnel carrier. But now, probably, have already departed from this? Therefore, a modern armored personnel carrier should be more a carrier than a combat / armored one ... Dimensions are almost not important. The combat module can be left. Only autonomous.
    The BTR-70 was a disgusting car. Landing through lateral minks in tactical classes is another attraction. The tandem of gasoline engines is pain and sadness ... Here is the 80ka-shaitan-arba. ))) Wonderful machine. It is not surprising that it is still in service.
    BMP-3 did not find. But the BMP-2 .... In general, nothing wrong. And they drove wonderfully in the landing. Only in helmets, more like everything around you put your head on.

    ... And the fundamental question remains, which holds the fistulas and BMP, and BTR-buoyancy.
  • d4rkmesa
    d4rkmesa 29 June 2020 20: 40
    0
    The module will be different, not "Epoch", they will do something of their own.
  • bars1
    bars1 29 June 2020 20: 45
    0
    Quote: d4rkmesa
    The module will be different, not "Epoch", they will do something of their own.

    The module will be what MO wants.
  • Local from the Volga
    Local from the Volga 29 June 2020 20: 46
    +1
    "However, in this case, there is nothing to choose from: Russia, we recall, still does not have its conditional analogue FGM-148 Javelin" STAFF ???? !!!! Lavrov !!!!
    1. 5-9
      5-9 30 June 2020 09: 25
      +2
      In fragile minds, Javelin is an all-sweeping prodigy that needs to be directed towards the enemy (+/- 45 degrees), shout AlalayavBar or HeroyamSala, close his eyes, press the shutter, and he himself will find the Most Important Enemy Target and hit it with a beautiful explosion in TNT equivalent of 150 kg ...
      1. Alien ...
        Alien ... 30 June 2020 14: 35
        0
        Yeah ... Before the appearance of the Stinger in Afghanistan, they thought about the same thing. What ended, did not tell?
        1. 5-9
          5-9 30 June 2020 14: 42
          +2
          Told .... up to 60 launches per hour during the operation "Magistral" - "no losses." Soviet aviation quickly adjusted itself. The losses are ten times less than Vietnam, where the Stingers were not.
          1. Alien ...
            Alien ... 30 June 2020 17: 02
            0
            Losses - about 1000 boards. Basically (yes totally ...) - turntables ... The USA in Vietnam lost about 4000 aircraft. There were no stingers ... There were MiGs and air defense systems ...
            I mean: we still do not know what the Javelins are capable of under real conditions. Stingers based on the same principle, we know ...
            For educational program: https://vk.com/video-124582727_456239285
            Milan missed, destruction by Java ...
            1. 5-9
              5-9 2 July 2020 12: 15
              0
              So how much is lost from the Stinger? ... It seems to me that the most effective in terms of the number of air defense in Afghanistan is the DShK ...
              1. Alien ...
                Alien ... 2 July 2020 12: 25
                0
                You give up wrong ... Absolutely wrong. Even in nete are full of information ...
  • tank-master
    tank-master 29 June 2020 22: 52
    0
    !!! A specialist in the armored sphere, Alexei Khlopotov, noted that the cause of the incident could be an abnormal operation of the thermal smoke equipment - a device for setting smoke curtains. “As a rule, the principle of its operation is the direct injection of diesel fuel into the hot exhaust pipe of the engine with a lack of oxygen,” the expert wrote, adding that he does not exclude the possibility of depressurization or interruption of the pipeline connection. !!!!
    Since when ... a "librarian" who has not served in the army for a day and has not worked with BTT and has not even studied in this area .. calls himself a "specialist" ... before referring to Khlopotov ... find out that he finished .. and the fact that he rubs in a get-together ... would-be specialists ... who only cut the loot .. on the sale of CDs ... it's not specialists .. but hucksters.
  • Dmitry Donskoy_2
    Dmitry Donskoy_2 30 June 2020 09: 04
    0
    This is a smart technique that clings to smoke or not! The main dust in the eyes!
  • 5-9
    5-9 30 June 2020 09: 21
    +2
    The latter can hardly be called a modern solution. Such systems do not fully ensure the principle of “shot-forgot,” they require illumination up to hitting the target, and they can unmask the one who fires, which ultimately can end badly for the Boomerang itself. However, there is nothing to choose from in this case: Russia, recall, still does not have its conditional counterpart FGM-148 Javelin,

    Again, not the Death Star, ZGRLS - no, anti-satellite missiles - no, nuclear torpedoes - no ....

    Let us answer the following questions before such statements.
    1. On which BMPs are ATGMs with "fire-forget"?
    2. What kind of infantry fighting vehicle does Javelin stand on and why is this light (and specific) ATGM in general for an infantry fighting vehicle?
    3. Which BMP in the world has an armament complex more powerful than the Age?

    This is an infantry fighting vehicle, not a self-propelled ATGM (for this there is a Chrysanthemum), an ATGM in it for self-defense from tanks (or its illusion) and fighting brothers. And then, the big question is, how many Cornets he needs with godfather, and how many with OD warheads. Therefore, the "fire and forget" BMP is not needed, because most often he will shoot at stationary targets "2 meters to the left of that aspen", "in-z" will not be able to.

    The Germans won Pumu at 43 tons of maximum weight at the cost of a bridge without any ATGM so far ...
    1. Thomas N.
      Thomas N. 2 July 2020 03: 30
      +2
      Quote: 5-9
      Let us answer the following questions before such statements.
      1. On which BMPs are ATGMs with "fire-forget"?
      .
      The Germans won Pumu at 43 tons of maximum weight at the cost of a bridge without any ATGM so far ...

      It is on the Puma BMP that the MELLS ATGM is installed with two Spike-LR ATGMs equipped with a seeker ("fire-forget"). Also, Spike-LRs were installed in 2018 on the Marder 1A5 BMP (battalion kit). Well, the actual Israeli BMP Namer IFV is equipped with the same Spike-LR.
      1. 5-9
        5-9 2 July 2020 12: 22
        -1
        These are conversations for the time being ... all the Cougars made just with a cannon and the question of the feasibility of ATGM have been procrastinated for years. Yes, and these pumas - with a gulkin nose in quantity.
        But, yes, you answered the question ... only ... the average flight speed of a rocket on a trajectory of 130-180 m / s. and 700 mm and 900 mm (for LR-2) is not what we should dream about ...
  • Pavel57
    Pavel57 30 June 2020 16: 10
    0
    Yes, at one time they stopped the BTR-90 and lost foreign markets.
  • iouris
    iouris 1 July 2020 23: 19
    -2
    Boomerang is a tool for hunting parrots, it always returns back to the aborigine. They would call the car in Russian simply "Boomer".
  • The comment was deleted.
  • Thomas N.
    Thomas N. 2 July 2020 04: 07
    0
    Quote: Per se.

    Looking at this photo and another one that compares the dimensions of the Kurganets-25 and BMD-4 BMPs, I remembered one idea expressed in the 70s of the XX century when discussing the development of the Marder 1 BMP in the German magazine Soldat und Technik (unfortunately I don't remember the number). The essence of the proposal was to separate the functions of transporting infantry and its fire support by developing instead of one BMP on a six-wheel chassis (Marder 1) two vehicles with the same level of protection: an armored personnel carrier on 4-5 rollers, armed only with a machine gun, and a relatively small vehicle fire support on 3 (4?) rollers with a turret from Marder. According to this plan, both vehicles were supposed to act on the battlefield together. In my opinion, now this proposal is even more relevant.