Military Review

Rogozin will personally participate in the promotion of the Terminator tank support combat vehicle

153
Rogozin will personally participate in the promotion of the Terminator tank support combat vehicle
ARMS-TASS. Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Rogozin will personally participate in the promotion of a support combat vehicle tanks (BMPT) "Terminator".


"The Terminator fighting vehicle is my first love, in the promotion of which I will be personally involved," he said at a briefing today at the exhibition Defense and Defense - 2012.

“Some military people may not agree with me, but the Terminator combat vehicle, manufactured by Uralvagonzavod Research and Production Corporation, is very good and manoeuvrable enough, therefore many foreign delegations admire it,” Rogozin said, adding that Terminator is currently present at the arms exhibition in South Africa.

The Deputy Prime Minister stressed that he would personally accompany foreign delegations who would like to familiarize themselves with the combat characteristics of this vehicle when it was put up at the Prospector’s training ground.

BMPT "Terminator" - designed to combat enemy tanks and other armored vehicles, as well as to repel attacks of helicopters and low-flying aircraft. The Terminator is equipped with missile launchers with a range of up to 5 km. In addition, the BMPT mounted guns to combat easily armored targets and manpower of the enemy. The machine is also armed with two stabilized remote-controlled automatic grenade launchers AG-17D.

In the ammunition "Terminator" used ammunition, unified for all models of combat vehicles of Russian production.
153 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Ataturk
    Ataturk 27 August 2012 09: 40 New
    16
    Crammed by the most can not. There will be a good tank!

    1. bye
      bye 27 August 2012 11: 25 New
      20
      Quote: Ataturk
      Crammed by the most can not. There will be a good tank!

      Меня всегда смущает "лоббизм" в ВПК особенно, а тут он превращен чуть ли не в "героизм"... При всем уважении к Рогозину, как к чиновнику, я очень сомневаюсь в его знаниях в бронетехнике и знании современной тактики ведения БД. Знания о "Терминаторе" ему "влили в уши" манагеры с "Уралвагона", действуя по принципу "Не расхвалишь, не продашь"...
      My opinion about adopting new types of equipment is based on conducting real military trials, followed by discussion, managing military equipment, servicing technical equipment from technicians, etc.
      Пока же лично я вижу "битву лоббистов" и метания от итальянских колесных к "Терминатору" с поглядыванием на финскую технику :)
      1. Alexander Romanov
        Alexander Romanov 27 August 2012 11: 54 New
        +3
        Quote: bye
        Пока же лично я вижу "битву лоббистов" и

        And it will continue like this, even hunting is not a desire to write about it. A time has passed when the military made the decision on deliveries to the armed forces. At one fine point, some people realized that it was possible to make fortunes on the defense industry. private traders and businesses have nothing to do in the defense industry. We will buy not what is better, but what is more profitable.
        1. Alan
          Alan 27 August 2012 14: 47 New
          0
          Alexander Romanov,
          Двумя руками поддержу мне тоже непонятно как "комерсов" к секретам допускать можно request они "априори " сосредоточены на зарабатывании денег, а военные секреты ох какой ликвидный товар.Кроме того вкладывание денег в перспективные разработки нескоро окупятся и окупятся ли вообще. Получается вкладываться в перспективу будет государство(мы с вами) а купоны стричь на продаже техники частник.
          1. GHG
            GHG 28 August 2012 04: 36 New
            +1
            Это от них пришло...вроде концепция есть,а вот в деталях промашка,зачем машина ...поддержать танк?Бороться с воздухом? Есть "Тунгуска",что он там в ролике реально поразил?Да и название какое то западное.
        2. GHG
          GHG 28 August 2012 04: 17 New
          0
          The whole joke is that people who decide what will go to the aid of the military are decided by the one who did not even have a machine gun in their hands. It is necessary to change something.
      2. vorobey
        vorobey 27 August 2012 12: 02 New
        +4
        Quote: bye
        Пока же лично я вижу "битву лоббистов" и метания от итальянских колесных к "Терминатору" с поглядыванием на финскую технику :)

        close your eyes and relax. Hi Lesha. in fact, BMPT in my opinion is promising. There is simply no sensible peasant in MeO who could clearly fit her into the framework.

        That's a joke. The frame (the original name) does not fit into any frames.
        1. bye
          bye 27 August 2012 12: 09 New
          0
          Quote: vorobey
          in fact, BMPT in my opinion is promising

          Саш, это понятно...Но тут идет речь о открытом "продвижении" конкретной модели по какой то детской методике "Кто со мной тот герой, а кто без меня ..." От чиновника такого ранга лично мне смешно слышать подобные заявления...
          1. vorobey
            vorobey 27 August 2012 12: 17 New
            +6
            And I wouldn’t disdain in this way.

            Remember how cat 34 drove to Moscow. also a kind of lobbying. Why can Sukhoi and UVZ not, that a bird of low flight?
            1. Alexander Romanov
              Alexander Romanov 27 August 2012 12: 23 New
              +1
              Quote: vorobey
              Why can Sukhoi and UVZ not, that a bird of low flight?

              Sasha, Sukhoi has practically no competitors, but UVZ has a lot, and lobbyists' interests primarily affect their foreign partners. Without a decision at the state level (Putin) and his direct support for UVZ, leopards will buy stools with Makarov.
            2. bye
              bye 27 August 2012 12: 27 New
              +1
              Quote: vorobey
              . Why can Sukhoi and UVZ not, that a bird of low flight?

              Саш, вот отсюда и Суперджет в ...опе, благодаря Сухому, который чтобы "урвать бюджет" занялся разработкой не по профилю и с "Терминатором" не известно что... Завтра Путин скажет, что ему "Терминатор 2" нравится (омский) и что он его продвигать будет, а Медведев заявит, что ему "Терминатор - 3" по душе и он его будет продвигать.... Не дело чиновников "лоббировать" интересы отдельных предприятий ИМХО
              1. Alexander Romanov
                Alexander Romanov 27 August 2012 12: 39 New
                +3
                Quote: bye

                Саш, вот отсюда и Суперджет в ...опе, благодаря Сухому, который чтобы "урвать бюджет" занялся разработкой не по профилю

                Alexey, according to the Superjet, at the time of the beginning of the development, KNAAPO had no choice. The people were dismissed from the factory by the thousands and the rest worked 4 days a week. That was only then orders from the Moscow Region went. And how much money had been injected into Jet by that time, so there wasn’t much choice. But there was a lobby, they could give this project to Tupolev or Ilnik, BUT ................. hi
              2. vorobey
                vorobey 27 August 2012 12: 42 New
                +4
                Quote: bye
                Не дело чиновников "лоббировать" интересы отдельных предприятий ИМХО


                and our officials do not care about anything. especially the military. oh well hell with them. rather a war, rather a prisoner.

                scribe we are rams. We read one, understand the other.

                Quotes
                Боевая машина "Терминатор" - моя первая любовь, в продвижении которой я буду принимать личное участие", - заявил он сегодня на брифинге в рамках выставки "Оборона и защита - 2012".

                “Some military people may not agree with me, but the Terminator combat vehicle, manufactured by Uralvagonzavod Research and Production Corporation, is very good and manoeuvrable enough, therefore many foreign delegations admire it,” Rogozin said, adding that Terminator is currently present at the arms exhibition in South Africa.

                The Deputy Prime Minister stressed that he would personally accompany foreign delegations who would like to familiarize themselves with the combat characteristics of this vehicle when it was put up at the Prospector’s training ground.

                All. it will not be in the army. Rogozin said nothing about this, but they will shove it for export.
                1. bye
                  bye 27 August 2012 12: 57 New
                  +1
                  Quote: vorobey
                  The Deputy Prime Minister stressed that he would personally accompany foreign delegations who would like to familiarize themselves with the combat characteristics of this vehicle when it was put up at the Prospector’s training ground.

                  All. it will not be in the army. Rogozin said nothing about it, but they will shove for export.

                  Саш, вынужден признать твою правду. Я действительно "поверхностно" прочел новость и упустил этот ньюанс. Ты прав!!!, я "ЗА!!! Такое лобби!!!"
                  1. vorobey
                    vorobey 27 August 2012 13: 00 New
                    +1
                    I did it at first. But Rogozin keeps his word.

                    the truth, but not all of it.
                2. not good
                  not good 27 August 2012 16: 13 New
                  +2
                  Unfortunately, many foreign buyers do not want to take equipment that is not in the army. Therefore, it is quite possible that several samples will be shoved into the Russian army.
            3. Karish
              Karish 29 August 2012 20: 36 New
              0
              Quote: vorobey
              Remember how cat 34 drove to Moscow. also lobbying kind

              Well really laughing do not distort. In 39, Koshkin type drove the tank to Moscow himself, but he wouldn’t have time to think about it, as he and the whole family would have been either shot or sat.
              Imagine the picture, Koshkin, on a tank goes to Moscow, the first post stops him -
              - Where are you going, brother.
              - To Stalin, the Kremlin. crying fellow
        2. Goga
          Goga 27 August 2012 12: 17 New
          +5
          vorobey - Коллега, к этой БМПТ вопросы были и по вооружению и по численности экипажа, но одно то, что и без Рогозинского "лоббирования" эту технику закупает Казахстан говорит в пользу этой машины - в Казахстане армию оснащают продуманно и без всяких "метаний" - покупают то, что считают нужным и эта машина пришласьим "ко двору".
          1. bye
            bye 27 August 2012 12: 20 New
            +3
            Quote: Gogh
            в Казахстане армию оснащают продуманно и без всяких "метаний" - покупают то, что считают нужным и эта машина пришласьим "ко двору".

            Ой ли!!! Там как раз закупают только за "откаты", скандалов с закупками техники столько, что другим постсоветским странам и не снилось...
            1. Pimply
              Pimply 27 August 2012 13: 13 New
              -1
              О, тут поддержу. Скандалов было, особенно когда одна "откатная" группировка на другую наехала..
        3. Pimply
          Pimply 27 August 2012 13: 11 New
          -4
          And how is it promising? Well, really - it's a rather pointless thing
          1. vorobey
            vorobey 27 August 2012 13: 13 New
            +1
            Quote: Pimply
            And how is it promising? Well, really - it's a rather pointless thing


            Che worry then. Everything will not be in the army.

          2. not good
            not good 27 August 2012 16: 17 New
            0
            The thing may be necessary, but there is no experience in combat use, and there is no security for the main weapons. The machine is damp. Modifying is also finalizing.
          3. Dmitry Desnyansky
            Dmitry Desnyansky 28 August 2012 03: 20 New
            -2
            tough killer of all
      3. Pimply
        Pimply 27 August 2012 13: 09 New
        -3
        In principle, as an official, I also don’t really know what to respect for. For populism?
      4. black_eagle
        black_eagle 27 August 2012 14: 07 New
        +2
        BMD-4M was hushed up, but they stuck it out! On it is nothing new! Crammed a bunch of everything, but beautiful! but not functional! how will it show itself in the city? no way! 120 millimeters to him, an ordinary tank!
        1. plotnikov561956
          plotnikov561956 27 August 2012 18: 20 New
          +2
          Quote: black_eagle
          how will it show itself in the city? no way! 120 millimeters to him, an ordinary tank!

          It is in the city itself, as the tank will not show. A fresh example of this stupidity is Pasha Mercedes with tanks in Grozny
          1. black_eagle
            black_eagle 27 August 2012 23: 25 New
            +3
            I am generally silent about Grozny, the only reasonable explanation is that the command, before letting the young boys die, got drunk in the trash, I do not see a reasonable explanation for the other
      5. Hans grohman
        Hans grohman 27 August 2012 15: 12 New
        +1
        Quote: bye
        Меня всегда смущает "лоббизм" в ВПК особенно, а тут он превращен чуть ли не в "героизм"...

        Support!
        Тем более, что "Терминатор", на сколько мне известно довольно "сырая" машина. Но как уже здесь говорили, только полнообъемные войсковые испытания смогут дать окончательный ответ - "надо" или "не надо" оно (БМПТ) в том виде, как это предлагает завод, и если "не надо", то почему (что надо исправить/дополнить/и т.д.).
      6. beech
        beech 27 August 2012 22: 51 New
        +1
        nowhere is it written how and where to use this machine in conflicts, so the army does not need it nafik !!! for now)
      7. GHG
        GHG 28 August 2012 04: 12 New
        0
        The concept is good, I'm not talking about the lobby, but the tank can handle it anyway ... that's just why we need a car whose value can be equated to the tank.
      8. Karish
        Karish 29 August 2012 20: 32 New
        0
        Quote: bye
        Меня всегда смущает "лоббизм" в ВПК особенно, а тут он превращен чуть ли не в "героизм"... При всем уважении к Рогозину, как к чиновнику, я очень сомневаюсь в его знаниях в бронетехнике и знании современной тактики ведения БД. Знания о "Терминаторе" ему "влили в уши" манагеры с "Уралвагона", действуя по принципу "Не расхвалишь, не продашь"...

        do not take to heart. if we collect all the statements of Rogozin over the past half a year, then at least 3 submarines should be built, the floor of an aircraft carrier, and five or two leaders who disrupted the defense order were shot.
    2. dark_sp
      dark_sp 27 August 2012 13: 01 New
      +3
      Of course, to use such a machine in tandem with a machine tool, it seems to me it would be very reasonable !!
      1. bye
        bye 27 August 2012 13: 14 New
        0
        InoSMI read:

        The Iranian press, without any specific informational reason, addressed the topic of China's purchases of Russian weapons. Resalat (25.08) reports that over the past six months, China has acquired a significant number of Russian military helicopters worth $ 1,3 billion. Abrar (25.08) adds that, in addition to helicopters, engines were also purchased for jet fighters, while China plans new purchases, including tracking radars and air defense missiles. It is noted that in 2013 Russia plans to export arms to other countries in the amount of $ 13 billion, of which 15% falls to China..
      2. Lieutenant colonel
        Lieutenant colonel 28 August 2012 04: 56 New
        0
        For what purpose?
    3. in reserve
      in reserve 27 August 2012 22: 29 New
      +1
      Useless thing.
    4. crazyrom
      crazyrom 28 August 2012 00: 14 New
      -1
      just like footage from battlefield xnumx hehehe
    5. Evgen232
      Evgen232 28 August 2012 02: 00 New
      0
      In my opinion, everything is obvious here too http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jznxu8IIwII

      In my opinion, everything is obvious here too http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jznxu8IIwII

      plaque fly, you want to believe it or not, they’ll delete me. Connect the link by removing the unit in letters http://www.1youtube1.com/1watch?v=jznxu8IIwII
    6. alexng
      alexng 28 August 2012 08: 35 New
      0
      Not a bad harvester turned out with seeders and winders. He only sows panic at the enemy and dispels doubts and marsh moods.
  2. vorobey
    vorobey 27 August 2012 09: 42 New
    +7
    "Боевая машина "Терминатор" - моя первая любовь, в продвижении которой я буду принимать личное участие", - заявил он

    Let's see what your word weighs.
  3. volcano
    volcano 27 August 2012 09: 45 New
    +6
    Может для начала в войска "продвинем"?

    And then we only hear about foreign delegations
  4. esaul
    esaul 27 August 2012 09: 46 New
    +7
    Боевая машина "Терминатор" - моя первая любовь,

    Любовью надо дорожить" и, надеюсь, машина заслуживает того, чтобы Рогозин вынудил "противников" ( а они наверняка есть, как у любых видов вооружения - есть лоббисты) данной разработки. Только вот интересно, чьё нежелание преодолевает Рогозин и на чём основываются его оппоненты?
    Сразу хочу предварить возможные пустословные ысказывания - приведите конкретные примеры аргументов противников Рогозина в этом случае. Без жвачки типа - " Мебельщик", " Попилили" и т.д.
    1. yanus
      yanus 27 August 2012 10: 06 New
      +5
      БМПТ "Терминатор" - предназначена для борьбы с танками и другими бронированными машинами противника

      But what should the tanks do? Nice to dissect?

      as well as to repel the attacks of helicopters and low flying aircraft.

      Firstly, they simply do not enter the affected area of ​​30mm guns.
      Во-вторых, БМПТ просто не сможет навестись на них, чтобы сбить. Радара-то нет. А "вручную" фиг попадешь.

      "Терминатор" оснащен пусковыми установками управляемых ракет с дальностью стрельбы до 5 км .

      Well, tanks also have them.

      In addition, guns were installed on the BMPT to combat lightly armored targets and enemy manpower.

      Oddly enough, the tanks also have guns with which they can also hit infantry and armor.

      Also, the machine is armed with two stabilized remotely controlled automatic grenade launchers AG-17D.

      That is, AG stupidly duplicate the work of 30mm guns ...


      In this regard, the question is: what will this shushpantser do in the troops? 7 Why is he needed there?
      1. UzRus
        UzRus 27 August 2012 10: 21 New
        0
        yanusYes, the car is very ambiguous. With the same helicopters and low-flying targets, as well as other enemy armored vehicles, успешно могут бороться "Тунгуски" и/или "Панцири", если уж на то пошло. Всё остальное - танк и сам может справиться.
      2. KORESH80
        KORESH80 27 August 2012 10: 48 New
        0
        AG-17 does not duplicate a 30 mm gun, as it fires on mounted and can hit the enemy behind shelters, in trenches, etc.
        The BMPT Attack-T missile has a slightly greater range than tank missiles. What would she get by helicopter, it is necessary to keep the target in sight, the radar is not needed.
        Well, actually, for greater efficiency, you could install a pair of air defense systems. At least the NEEDLE is cheap and cheerful. Then it would be in fact the Terminator.
        1. black_eagle
          black_eagle 27 August 2012 23: 30 New
          0
          No one has yet canceled mortars in the troops, what is a 30 mm mine for ??? BMPT that stuck around grenades ??? Compared with the same non BMPT smokes
          Quote: KORESH80
          you need to keep the target in sight
          and helicopters now fly as targets in a dash in a straight line and do not shoot, Apache will fly BMPT for another 8 km, moreover, the helicopters have radars, unlike this miracle, it doesn’t
      3. viruskvartirus
        viruskvartirus 27 August 2012 12: 08 New
        +1
        "Для эффективного противодействия ударным вертолетам и БПЛА необходимо наличие средств ПВО непосредственно в боевых порядках, поскольку нападение или разведывательный облет осуществляется ими на малых высотах, что не позволяет вовремя обнаруживать их комплексами ПВО средней и большой дальности, располагаемых обычно глубоко в тылу.
        ПТРК «Корнет-ЭМ» является комплексом, способным эффективно решать такие задачи. "
        http://3mv.ru/forum/9-182-1
      4. Lieutenant colonel
        Lieutenant colonel 28 August 2012 05: 01 New
        0
        Always respected people who are used to using their heads. I definitely put you +. From the first moment the appearance of reports about such a miracle machine does not leave me feeling that in Moscow oblast they are now thinking backwards. Place and role of BMPT in battle? There is no answer, although in your post you give the correct answers.
      5. Karish
        Karish 29 August 2012 20: 43 New
        0
        Quote: yanus
        But what should the tanks do? Nice to dissect?

        Generally tanks, as a rule, destroy tanks, helicopters or portable anti-tank weapons. What is really needed is a heavy infantry fighting vehicle.
        And so, in my opinion, the Terminator, as it is, is a rather useless thing. Well, why does he need a 30mm gun, against tanks, it’s ridiculous, but to support the infantry is too powerful.
    2. volcano
      volcano 27 August 2012 10: 15 New
      +3
      Hello Valery

      Well, how can you bypass Serdyukov and Makarov?
      In the end, they rule the appearance of the sun.

      My opinion is this.
      The leadership of the Moscow Region sees the use of the armed forces in local conflicts and anti-terror (with which I personally fundamentally disagree)
      И несмотря, что "Уралвагонзавод" заявлял, что использование БМПТ будет эффективным именно в этом русле на самом деле ему место исключительно "на поле боя".
      In urban environments, for example, the Terminator will be as vulnerable as a tank.
      Nothing is better for protecting tanks in conditions of limited battle (that is, in a village, in mountain ranges, etc.) than infantry was not invented.

      Hence the conclusion that the machine is excellent, but its use is most expedient precisely in the battle formations of tank and motorized rifle troops.
      That is, when conducting a classic battle.
      НУ а возвращаясь к антитеррористической направленности нашей Армии и искреннему верованию, что 21 век закрыл вопрос с "большой войной" и открыл эпоху локальных войн и конфликтов...и создал конфликт интересов.

      Согласно Сердюкову и его "Армейскому антиреррору" ей места в Армии нет.
      Согласно Рогозину и его мнению о возможности "большой войны" и как следствие ведение традиционных боевых действий, Терминатор в Армии очень нужен.

      That's something like this and they may conflict at the top.
      I would say this is a consequence of a conflict of opinion.
      Personally, I agree with Rogozin.
      1. esaul
        esaul 27 August 2012 10: 22 New
        +2
        Quote: volkan
        that the machine is excellent, but its use is most expedient precisely in the battle formations of tank and motorized rifle troops. That is, when conducting a classic battle.


        Andrey, salute. It is this principle that is laid down in the methods of using BMPT and this is stated in all accompanying materials relating to the machine.

        Quote: volkan
        Согласно Сердюкову и его "Армейскому антиреррору" ей места в Армии нет

        Andrey, I would like to see or hear the facts on which such a statement is based.

        Quote: volkan
        Согласно Рогозину и его мнению о возможности "большой войны" и как следствие ведение традиционных боевых действий, Терминатор в Армии очень нужен.

        Quote: volkan
        Personally, I agree with Rogozin.


        I support these words with both hands, Andrei. For conclusions about the need for a car - a plus.
        1. volcano
          volcano 27 August 2012 10: 39 New
          +3
          Quote: esaul
          Andrey, I would like to see or hear the facts on which such a statement is based.


          So open and directly verbatim speeches I will not give you.
          I proceed from the fact that, firstly, almost all (although I do not like this word) speak of the era of local wars and the fight against terrorism. What I personally disagree with.
          А во-вторых глядя на учения нашей Армии за последние несколько лет, можно увидеть исключительно "борьбу с террором".

          So it turns out that the Russian Army and the Navy have been redirected and are practicing actions exclusively in this vein.

          Although my opinion on the reform ......
          It would be possible to create some really highly mobile brigades and calm down on this.
          They would ensure all anti-terrorism actions and interests of Russia in Local conflicts.

          Why was the whole structure and strength of the Army allowed to run down the drain.
          The army as a whole should be prepared to ensure the defense of the country from external aggression.
          And it should be imprisoned for this. And the weapons should be appropriate.

          Мы почему то стали стесняться говорить, что вот этот БМПТ, например предназначен для борьбы с "Абрамсами" или "Леопардами".
          This is not politically correct .... therefore, forced to customize for some sort of terrorists.
          This is wrong.

          When we talk about the S-400, for some reason we don’t speak directly .. Amerians shove and zilch will remain from your Air Force .... we begin to invent a hypothetical enemy ... and again some sort of terror.

          In my opinion, we have taken a bad example from the United States .... As they talk about the threat of Iran with its missile defense, so we repeat it ....

          Have you noticed that we have been rushing around with weapons for the last few years?
          This says only one thing .... We ourselves do not know what we want.
          There is no clear concept of the use of aircraft. Threats to Russia are identified incorrectly.
          Hence there is no clarity on the issue of what forces and means (including weapons) should be in the Army so that it is guaranteed to fulfill its mission.

          And in the specific case with the Terminator, everything looks exactly like that.
          1. vorobey
            vorobey 27 August 2012 10: 48 New
            +2
            So open and directly verbatim speeches I will not give you.

            But literal speeches and no. it is simply ignored from the very first show.

            Ground forces of varying severity

            By 2020, 42 new brigades will be created - heavy, medium, light and one snowmobile
            Victor Myasnikov


            Yesterday, Colonel-General Alexander Postnikov, Commander-in-Chief of the Ground Forces, spoke at a meeting of the Defense and Security Committee of the Federation Council. He spoke about further development plans until 2020. The new look of the Ground Forces will be refined and changed for more than one year.

            There are currently 70 brigades in the Ground Forces. By 2020, it is planned to increase their number to 109, including new brigades of a promising model. “There will be 42 prospective brigades, there will be 47 prospective military formations, including military bases abroad, which will be built on the same principle,” Alexander Postnikov explained. Apparently, this should be understood so that five promising brigades will be bases abroad. The principal difference between the new brigades and the old ones was not explained by the commander in chief.

            In the future, the Ground Forces will consist of new, heavy, medium and light brigades. Heavy brigades “will be armed with heavy platforms, that is, tanks and armored vehicles on a tank caterpillar chassis weighing up to 65 tons with heavy weapons” - a 125 mm cannon. All domestic tanks manufactured since 1966 have such characteristics - T-64, T-72, T-80 and T-90. So we can assume that there will be no rearmament to a new tank of the XNUMXst century. At the storage bases, heavy armored vehicles are enough.
            1. vorobey
              vorobey 27 August 2012 10: 49 New
              +1
              In the new state arms program until 2020, a significant amount of funds is allocated for the modernization of weapons and military equipment. Old tanks can be removed from storage, equipped with modern electronic systems, hung with dynamic protection boxes or equipped with the Arena active defense complex. And put in order.

              Medium brigades will be planted on amphibious boomerang-type armored personnel carriers. According to Colonel-General Postnikov, experimental design work is underway to create such machines. Nothing is known about this model of armored vehicles. And the name “Boomerang” was first heard. There is information that it is being developed in Kurgan. It is difficult to say whether, until 2020, it will be possible to develop, test, adopt, and launch a new model in the series. If it doesn’t work out, you can buy something similar abroad. Such a tendency exists and is already becoming stable.

              Light brigades will be equipped with Tiger armored vehicles weighing up to 2,5 tons, equally effective in mountainous areas and in the Arctic regions. The expression "Tiger armored car" is somewhat alarming. This may also mean that instead of the Tigers, Italian Lynx armored vehicles are urgently purchased. Their licensed production may begin in Russia this year. The Russian Defense Ministry has already chosen a supplier of light armor. This is the German company Rheinmetall Chempro. It was not for nothing that Colonel-General Postnikov complained to the deputies: “Those types of weapons that industry produces, including armored weapons, artillery and small arms, do not match the standards of NATO and even China in their parameters.” According to him, at present, the share of modern weapons and military equipment in the Ground Forces is 12%, and by 2020 this figure should increase to 70%. You can’t do without foreign help.
              In addition to brigades of varying severity, one special brigade will be created for operations in the Arctic. It will be based in the district center of Pechenga, Murmansk region. Similar Arctic brigades are already being formed in the USA and Canada. Apparently, in order to balance the situation, this team will be deployed near the borders of Norway and Finland.
              1. vorobey
                vorobey 27 August 2012 10: 52 New
                +3
                This statement was March 15.03.2011, 2020. logically we consider even if they find use for the terminator, because there is no concept for its application now in the armed forces, then by XNUMX it can really become obsolete. so that even in the guise of new brigades they do not see him.
                1. Kars
                  Kars 27 August 2012 10: 55 New
                  +4
                  Quote: vorobey
                  because concept of its application now in the sun no

                  Well, the sun is a well-known retrograde, which usually takes into account its own, and again, usually bloody mistakes.
                  There is no concept, so let it be developed, Guderian did not have tanks, but he developed the tactics of tank troops, and now there are machines, and for some people laziness to raise the lower body.
                  1. vorobey
                    vorobey 27 August 2012 11: 01 New
                    +3
                    Hello hello. It seems to me that now Guderian’s work is getting a second birth. His theory of classifying tanks into breakthrough tanks, infantry escorts now finds reflection in brigades of heavy medium and light.
                    1. Kars
                      Kars 27 August 2012 11: 07 New
                      +3
                      ..All new, this is a well-forgotten old ..-- seems never to lose its relevance.
                  2. volcano
                    volcano 27 August 2012 11: 33 New
                    +2
                    Quote: Kars
                    There is no concept, so let it be developed, Guderian did not have tanks, but he developed the tactics of tank troops, and now there are machines, and for some people laziness to raise the lower body.


                    Hello Kars

                    Very accurately said.

                    First, CONCEPT (THOUGHT) then SOLUTION-EXECUTION-RESULT.

                    The trouble is that either there are no thoughts, or they are wrong
                    1. DIMS
                      DIMS 27 August 2012 14: 57 New
                      -1
                      CONCEPT (THOUGHT)

                      The military-industrial complex needs income, preferably high

                      SOLUTION

                      Vparit something MO more expensive, and at the minimum cost for its part

                      EXECUTION

                      Rogozin presses on MO, MO buys

                      RESULT

                      Mobile sets of spare parts for their normal equipment enter the combat units
                  3. Pimply
                    Pimply 27 August 2012 13: 16 New
                    -1
                    To be honest, Andrei, I somehow do not see the point in this prodigy. That's honest.
                    1. DIMS
                      DIMS 27 August 2012 15: 02 New
                      -1
                      Well, its sale will bring income.
                      1. Pimply
                        Pimply 27 August 2012 15: 19 New
                        -1
                        Well, maybe
                    2. Kars
                      Kars 28 August 2012 12: 27 New
                      +1
                      And I personally see. Just do not focus on armor penetration.
                      tank units need a machine to fight tank dangerous infantry.
                      To do this, she needs automatic grenade launchers. Quick-firing automatic guns and maximum visibility.
                      Also, in heavy tank formations, it can allow the use of cheaper and protected armored personnel carriers by reducing the number of infantry fighting vehicles, where it is necessary to compromise between security and firepower.

                      In general, I’m just annoyed by the excuse --- We do not have charters on which to use it (replace the charter with - concept, place in the ranks)
                      So you think they’ll come up with a blaster or an anti-gravity tank --- and we don’t need MO, we don’t have charters, Beeeee.
                      Retrogrades and people without imagination are about the military, there are such people in the discussion.
                      1. Pimply
                        Pimply 28 August 2012 18: 40 New
                        -1
                        Let's take a look. Where is she? Tank dangerous infantry will cough this crap. Because the range of the tank infantry will be five kilometers in the open. In the format that is now, those inside are corpses. And there will be many corpses, with the security that is at the moment.

                        Then - how accurate and powerful is the 30 mm gun? How much is her real range?
                        The machine, in fact, duplicates the tank pointlessly enough - only with serious limitations
                      2. Kars
                        Kars 28 August 2012 18: 51 New
                        0
                        Quote: Pimply
                        Because the range of the tank infantry will be five kilometers

                        Yes, of course - they will arm everyone with spikes. Tank dangerous infantry is 250 meters.
                        and if you take your 5 km, then everything is tanks, and armored personnel carriers and bmp corpses. But as you can see your SECOND Lebanese war has refuted this.
                        Quote: Pimply
                        with the security that is at the moment

                        At the moment, in the Terminator, only the presence of ATGMs raises my question, and the security is more or less normal --- better than that of the BMP-2
                        Quote: Pimply
                        Then - how accurate and powerful is the 30 mm gun?

                        She stands on the BMP-2 for a long time (not this one); 25 mm stands on Bradley
                        Quote: Pimply
                        The machine, in fact, duplicates the tank pointlessly enough - only with serious limitations

                        The machine complements the tank, and does not duplicate - not even talking about the fact that the tank has limited ammunition for the main gun.

                        And of course - the machine should be improved, and I see it not quite like that. But for the Russian Federation it is this machine that should give experience, and is fully suitable for the current threats. The type of Chechnya and the new cast to Tbillisi.
                      3. Pimply
                        Pimply 28 August 2012 23: 37 New
                        -1
                        Quote: Kars
                        At the moment, in the Terminator, only the presence of ATGMs raises my question, and the security is more or less normal --- better than that of the BMP-2


                        It is better. But if it were BMP - I would understand. But is it still not, or am I wrong?

                        Quote: Kars

                        She stands on the BMP-2 for a long time (not this one); 25 mm stands on Bradley

                        To be honest - Bradley is not my favorite either.

                        Когда-то - по огневой мощи, на меня реальное впечатление произвели "вулканы" зенитчиков, установленные на М113. Они просто страшные, и это сумасшедшая скорострельность. Это страшная штука, и одной очереди сносит дом небольшой.

                        IMHO, what the terminator is now, should be greatly modified, converted to BMP. The module must be remotely controlled. More safety for the crew. Plus - KAZs and completion of tanks. In its current form, it is nothing more than a concept car.

                        IMHO, the normal support for tanks is infantry, helicopters and UAVs. And this is a miracle - from their lack of
                      4. Kars
                        Kars 28 August 2012 23: 46 New
                        0
                        Quote: Pimply
                        But is it still not, or am I wrong?

                        Is it possible without Jewish / clothes?

                        the fact that it is quite protected, and there is no absolutely secure, as Merkava 4 showed.
                        Quote: Pimply
                        "вулканы" зенитчиков

                        The same 20 mm. And the rate of fire - what is the rate of fire? It is needed for firing at aviation. Yes, and I weakly believe that the 20 mm is thrown out to do something at home, but I do not mind the 40-45 mm guns, depending on how it says on ammunition.
                        Quote: Pimply
                        converted to BMP

                        Why in the BMP? Why land the landing on a barrel of ammunition? And under the same ammunition and weapons to reduce the transported landing?
                        Quote: Pimply
                        IMHO, the normal support for tanks is infantry, helicopters and UAVs

                        Infantry is by itself. Helicopters are expensive, rare, and they will not be able to hang over armor all the time, but they can be beaten up in urban areas. UAVs - let them be, but not a fact.
                        Quote: Pimply
                        And this is a miracle - from their lack of

                        Strange conclusion. In the Russian Federation ran out of infantry or MI-24?
                      5. Pimply
                        Pimply 29 August 2012 00: 12 New
                        0
                        Quote: Kars
                        Is it possible without Jewish / clothes?

                        How can a Jew, without Jewish stuff? wink


                        Quote: Kars
                        the fact that it is quite protected, and there is no absolutely secure, as Merkava 4 showed.

                        Can not be. But there is where to go.


                        Quote: Kars
                        Why in the BMP? Why land the landing on a barrel of ammunition? And under the same ammunition and weapons to reduce the transported landing?


                        Yes, the landing. And with the correct layout and protection of the crew, this will not be such a question.


                        Quote: Kars
                        Infantry is by itself. Helicopters are expensive, rare, and they will not be able to hang over armor all the time, but they can be beaten up in urban areas. UAVs - let them be, but not a fact.

                        Constantly - they can’t. But under certain conditions they should.


                        Quote: Kars
                        Strange conclusion. In the Russian Federation ran out of infantry or MI-24?

                        And here is the question of training some, and the ability to respond to the modern conditions of others.


                        Quote: Kars
                        The same 20 mm. And the rate of fire - what is the rate of fire? It is needed for firing at aviation. Yes, and I weakly believe that the 20 mm is thrown out to do something at home, but I do not mind the 40-45 mm guns, depending on how it says on ammunition.

                        Делает красивые такие дыры. От снарядов тоже зависит. Но у нас после такой обработки небольшой, двухминутной - народец пошел сдаваться. Причем 10 красавцев - т.н. "с кровью на руках". Страшная штука, психологически. Очень страшная.
                      6. Kars
                        Kars 29 August 2012 12: 12 New
                        0
                        Quote: Pimply
                        Yes, the landing. And with the correct layout and protection of the crew, this will not be such a question.

                        But wonders like BMP-3 will not be obtained? Because there are no miracles, and a few tons of weapons and ammunition will become a weight reserve to increase protection while maintaining mobility .-- and the price will be less.
                        Quote: Pimply
                        Constantly - cannot

                        And BMPT can. And it will cost less than a helicopter.
                        Quote: Pimply
                        And here is the question of training some, and the ability to respond to the modern conditions of others

                        And this is another question that does not correspond to this statement--
                        Quote: Pimply
                        normal support for tanks is infantry, helicopters and UAVs. And this is a miracle - from their lack of

                        Quote: Pimply
                        But after such processing we have a small, two-minute

                        Shilka also terrified the Majahideen.
                      7. Pimply
                        Pimply 29 August 2012 15: 36 New
                        -1
                        I can’t look at the BMN-3 without a shudder. In fact, the Russian army needs a normal armored infantry fighting vehicle on a tank platform, and not a miracle like a Terminator, with a remote weapon module.

                        Quote: Kars
                        And BMPT can. And it will cost less than a helicopter.

                        Тут дешевизна относительная. Та же Меркава накрывала ночью стрелков на 4км. И на фига там эта поддержка пулеметная? Имхо, надо развивать возможности танков, а не давать им вот такую "поддержку", делать танки более многофункциональными и развивать методики их защиты.

                        А насчет Шилки - по воспоминаниям бойцов, штурмовавших дворец Амина, снаряды "Шилки" отскакивали от стен, как орехи...



                      8. Kars
                        Kars 29 August 2012 15: 55 New
                        0
                        Quote: Pimply
                        you need a normal BMP on a tank platform, and not a miracle-yudo like Terminator, with a remote weapon module.


                        Strange you continue to mix BMP and BMPT even though these are different machines for their intended purpose.
                        Quote: Pimply
                        The same Merkava covered shooters at night at 4km

                        And the professor believes that at night shooters can be found no longer than 100 meters.

                        But I think that the described case occurred in a fairly open area?
                        Quote: Pimply
                        IMHO, it is necessary to develop the capabilities of tanks

                        It does not interfere
                        Quote: Pimply
                        , штурмовавших дворец Амина, снаряды "Шилки" отскакивали от стен

                        The Vulkanovskys would also bounce

                        So instead of a very expensive and dangerous infantry fighting vehicle, tank armored units with a low profile, loopholes for personnel and a machine gun for self-defense and assault forces of 12-16 people will be more effective in armored personnel carriers with 30-45 mm cannons having an elevation angle of up to 90 degrees, AGS complex of caliber 30-50 mm, machine guns paired with guns and a PTURS lifting complex.
                        BPM can be used in light compounds where there is none or small MBT.
                      9. Pimply
                        Pimply 29 August 2012 18: 26 New
                        0
                        I am confusing because for me the concept of BMPT is doubtful.

                        In principle - yes, although not quite, there are buildings and hills everywhere.

                        In principle, a certain level can be seen briefly in this video.


                        By the way, this video may also seem interesting, from the 2009 of the year, the tactics of destroying single targets for several km ATGMs.
                      10. Kars
                        Kars 29 August 2012 18: 35 New
                        0
                        Quote: Pimply
                        single targets for several km ATGMs.

                        Well, you don’t have enough money for this. And this, as I have already noted, is not quite a war.
                        Quote: Pimply
                        BMPT is doubtful

                        For you, for me, no.

                        Can you show the Israeli BMP?
                      11. Pimply
                        Pimply 29 August 2012 19: 58 New
                        -1
                        Andrey, you’ll say for all three options that this is not an 8 IFV)
                      12. Kars
                        Kars 29 August 2012 20: 09 New
                        0
                        Well, until you try, you don’t know.
                        But your doubt, as it were, hints that the AOI has no BMP as such.
                        Although the NAMER impresses me, but as I understand it, they are not in a hurry to overload it with weapons. And the Vulcan network would look good on it. By the way, what is its height on the roof of the building?
                      13. Pimply
                        Pimply 30 August 2012 11: 18 New
                        -1
                        No, 8 does not bother me) Just knowing your skepticism, I fear 8 in advance)))

                        По-моему, и Намер, и Ахзарит вполне удачными машинами получились. Серийная версия «Намер» будет оборудоваться модулем вооружения с дистанционным управлением «Rafael», включающим (в разных вариантах) 7,62-мм либо 12,7-мм пулемет, 30-мм механическую пушку, 40-мм механический гранатомет. Зная ЦАХАЛь (и изучив картинки 8) будут ставить, скорее всего, пушку 12.7 либо 40мм гранатомет. Плюс дублем "Маги"



                        The volcano looks like this on M113. But now the fashion for remote modules. so the profile will definitely be lower.

                      14. Kars
                        Kars 30 August 2012 16: 49 New
                        0
                        And where does my skepticism come about --- if they are not even BMPs in your data? And even the modules can withstand even shelling from a heavy machine gun.
                        They put something similar on M113.
                        The volcano’s start-up is just 113 people, for example, in M11, there are only 2 people + ammunition in the ZSU except for the crew. Its 20 mm armor penetration is 61 mm per 8 meters. (We won’t remember about aviation ammunition) 1000 mm same distance angle 20.
                        So buildings can be destroyed but very hard.
                      15. Pimply
                        Pimply 30 August 2012 21: 29 New
                        0
                        According to our classification, they are nagmash. Armored infantry, conditionally. In Israel there is no such a strict classification of vehicles as it was in the USSR, and even now the concepts of armored personnel carriers and infantry fighting vehicles are extremely frustrated.

                        A lot depends on what ammunition is used.

                        About the module

                        In the protected version

                        Pay attention to increased accuracy, especially when moving, the possibility of fixing the target, a reduced profile, etc.
                      16. Pimply
                        Pimply 30 August 2012 21: 32 New
                        0
                        According to our classification, they are nagmash. Armored infantry, conditionally. In Israel there is no such a strict classification of vehicles as it was in the USSR, and even now the concepts of armored personnel carriers and infantry fighting vehicles are extremely frustrated.

                        A lot depends on what ammunition is used.

                        About the module

                        [media = http: //youtu.be/jp82DIHV84Q]

                        In the protected version

                        Pay attention to increased accuracy, especially when moving, the possibility of fixing the target, a reduced profile, etc.
                      17. Pimply
                        Pimply 30 August 2012 21: 34 New
                        -1
                        According to our classification, they are nagmash. Armored infantry, conditionally. In Israel there is no such a strict classification of vehicles as it was in the USSR, and even now the concepts of armored personnel carriers and infantry fighting vehicles are extremely frustrated.

                        A lot depends on what ammunition is used.

                        About the module



                        In the protected version



                        Pay attention to increased accuracy, especially when moving, the possibility of fixing the target, a reduced profile, etc.
  5. Karish
    Karish 29 August 2012 20: 47 New
    0
    Quote: Pimply
    Когда-то - по огневой мощи, на меня реальное впечатление произвели "вулканы" зенитчиков, установленные на М113. Они просто страшные, и это сумасшедшая скорострельность. Это страшная штука, и одной очереди сносит дом небольшой

    Saw, During the operation * Protective wall * Under Jenin. Cut the floors with the arrows, like a knife. Scary thing.
  6. Pimply
    Pimply 30 August 2012 11: 08 New
    0
    У меня друзья там были, в 51-м гдуде и 13-м. Я сам "Защитную стену" в Шхеме делал
  • esaul
    esaul 27 August 2012 10: 57 New
    0
    Quote: volkan
    So open and directly verbatim speeches I will not give you.


    I'm sorry

    Quote: volkan
    А во-вторых глядя на учения нашей Армии за последние несколько лет, можно увидеть исключительно "борьбу с террором".


    Андрей, данная формулировка названий - дань современной " моде" в эпоху пресловутой пере(ЗА)грузки. Запад ведь то же все учения проводит исключително под знаменем борьбы с международным террором. А во времена инфо войны любой пшик с воинственным названием может быть истолкован лишь, как подготовка к войне. Лицемерие во благо - с обеих сторон.
    Quote: volkan
    Have you noticed that we’ve been rushing around with weapons for the last few years? This says only one thing .... We ourselves don’t know what we want. There is no clear concept of the use of aircraft. Threats to Russia are identified incorrectly.


    Andrey, climb higher and higher. In order to say so, you need to be thoroughly familiar with at least the weapons plans and build your assumptions and conclusions on this. Stopudovo, I am sure that you do not have all the information available, like the majority of forum users. So - just beautifully laid out emotions of an indifferent person.
    Good luck, Andrew hi
    1. volcano
      volcano 27 August 2012 11: 41 New
      0
      Quote: esaul
      Stopudovo, I’m sure that you do not have all the information available, like the majority of forum users. And that means - just beautifully laid out emotions of an indifferent person.


      It is a fact. but trying to analyze. I’m looking where we are rolling, not on paper, but in practice.

      Want to tell a joke?

      Last year, a certain inspection from the General Staff arrived in a certain base of certain submarines.
      Since the submarines are consolidated in our Navy in the division .... then they began to check for compliance with everything and everything ....... the usual division ..... Naturally, the submarine division is not as armed as the MC of the Division or Tank .. .yes any other well did not match.
      However, the inspectors of the General Staff men ..... stubbornly thrashed the cons in the results of the audit, arguing that since there are no submarine division states ... then we are checking for what is .....
      The result was expected ...... flew reprimands of the NSS as from a cornucopia.
      It would be funny and even ridiculous .... BUT IN A NEW APPEARANCE POSSIBLE AND SUCH.
      Question And where are the brains ??? After all, this is no less, but complete insanity.
      Из таких вот историй и складывается ощущение "ненормальности происходящего".
      1. vorobey
        vorobey 27 August 2012 11: 52 New
        +2
        Quote: volkan
        Question And where are the brains ???



        Fima, close your mouth on that side, let the doctor calmly make an opinion of himself.

        Brains and opinion. our defense husbands were confronted with what was not before in the armed forces. A computer with an old motherboard crashed and as a result there is still no clearly voiced opinion from anyone.

        Despite official statements that by 2010 one company of the ground forces will be created, fully equipped with new vehicles, in 2009 the adoption of the BMPT for the Russian Armed Forces did not take place, serial production has not begun. In early 2010, it was officially announced the rejection of the procurement of new BMPTs and the conversion of obsolete tanks for this project.
        1. volcano
          volcano 27 August 2012 12: 01 New
          +2
          Quote: vorobey
          Despite official statements that by 2010 one company of the ground forces will be created, fully equipped with new vehicles, in 2009 the adoption of the BMPT for the Russian Armed Forces did not take place, serial production has not begun. In early 2010, it was officially announced the rejection of the procurement of new BMPTs and the conversion of obsolete tanks for this project.


          Greetings vorobey

          Yes, I also read it.

          Пытаюсь до Валерия донести мысль, что "гладко было на бумаге, да забыли про овраги".
          Apparently it doesn’t work out.

          Несмотря на просачивающиеся в СМИ материалы у большинства видимо все таки стоит перед глазами "положительный эффект" реформ.

          Только вот почему то большинство офицеров "если не для протокола" уверенно считают, что обороноспособность "в следствие реформ" упала в разы.
          Ну это тоже видимо от того, что они "всей информацией не обладают"

          This is me so no offense to Valery.
          1. bye
            bye 27 August 2012 12: 06 New
            +1
            Quote: volkan
            Пытаюсь до Валерия донести мысль, что "гладко было на бумаге, да забыли про овраги".

            Там бестолку убеждать, кроме "Слава Путину" мозг ничего не воспринимает...
            Quote: volkan
            Только вот почему то большинство офицеров "если не для протокола" уверенно считают, что обороноспособность "в следствие реформ" упала в разы.
            Ну это тоже видимо от того, что они "всей информацией не обладают"

            The populist introduction of a one-year life span did with the Army what Tagen and EBN could not do ...
            1. volcano
              volcano 27 August 2012 12: 13 New
              +1
              Quote: bye

              Quote: volkan
              Пытаюсь до Валерия донести мысль, что "гладко было на бумаге, да забыли про овраги".
              Там бестолку убеждать, кроме "Слава Путину" мозг ничего не воспринимает...


              Well, I would not say that. Rather, there is a correct approach to the issue.
              Valery proceeds from what he reads and hears in statements.
              And again, like any intelligent person, he understands that he does not possess the entirety of the information. Which by the way is a very correct position.

              I proceed from the fact that the fact of fraud is very developed in our country. The leadership often does not know what is actually happening on the ground and in the troops, and makes an assessment solely from MO reports and reports on successful exercises.
              And this is based on my experience TWO BIG DIFFERENCES.
              1. bye
                bye 27 August 2012 12: 18 New
                0
                Quote: volkan
                I proceed from the fact that the fact of fraud is very developed in our country. The leadership often does not know what is actually happening on the ground and in the troops, and makes an assessment solely from MO reports and reports on successful exercises.

                Наследие советских времен... Вот как то странно, но хорошие советские традиции были успешно "похерены", а вся "гнусь" как то странно прижилась и в новой формации...
              2. vorobey
                vorobey 27 August 2012 12: 50 New
                +1
                Andrei, I answered there above.
                I repeat.
                Quote: vorobey
                scribe we are rams. We read one, understand the other.

                Quotes
                Боевая машина "Терминатор" - моя первая любовь, в продвижении которой я буду принимать личное участие", - заявил он сегодня на брифинге в рамках выставки "Оборона и защита - 2012".

                “Some military people may not agree with me, but the Terminator combat vehicle, manufactured by Uralvagonzavod Research and Production Corporation, is very good and manoeuvrable enough, therefore many foreign delegations admire it,” Rogozin said, adding that Terminator is currently present at the arms exhibition in South Africa.

                The Deputy Prime Minister stressed that he would personally accompany foreign delegations who would like to familiarize themselves with the combat characteristics of this vehicle when it was put up at the Prospector’s training ground.

                All. it will not be in the army. Rogozin said nothing about this, but they will shove it for export.
              3. volcano
                volcano 27 August 2012 14: 04 New
                +1
                Quote: volkan
                Может для начала в войска "продвинем"?

                And then we only hear about foreign delegations


                да я выше вот тоже "намекнул"
  • Aaron Zawi
    Aaron Zawi 27 August 2012 15: 11 New
    +1
    I’m wondering who was interested in open information, how many tanks are planned to have in the armies of Germany, France, and Britain in the coming years? And you google Mr., you’ll be surprised.
    1. volcano
      volcano 27 August 2012 17: 58 New
      -1
      Quote: Aron Zaavi
      I’m wondering who was interested in open information, how many tanks are planned to have in the armies of Germany, France, and Britain in the coming years? And you google Mr., you’ll be surprised.


      And this is what you Dear?
      Hint that everything is fine with us and there is nothing to roll the barrel for reform ???

      So I will answer you simply ..... We must take into account the totality of the US and European armies and be prepared to confront them ALL and IMMEDIATELY.

      Of course, this is bad and very difficult for the country ... and all that is expensive, but what can you do if this happened historically and politically.

      So our Army should be a BIG, WELL-EQUIPPED MILITARY MACHINE IN WHICH PROFESSIONALS ON EXCELLENT TECHNOLOGY SERVICE.

      What will be the use of the army of millions, which the state has maintained for about 20 years, for example ..... also spends a lot of money ... it’s hard for the country ...... well, groans and contains ..........
      And the hour comes .... and this Army could not resist ... did not defend the country .......
      and now the country is hosted by NATO remnants .... And all ..... there is no Russia .... there are no Russians

      WHAT THEN ???? Yes, if Putin Serdyukov and Medvedev honestly shoot that nothing will change.


      Why do we need the Army, which even on paper is not able to protect, because it loses in quantity and even in many ways in quality.

      Well, we don’t have a miracle of weapons that MIRACLE RICHERS will keep in MIRACLE SUCCESS ..... NO.


      There is a miracle .....

      So it turns out that the military reform is a stupid Sisyphean labor. Because the result is still unsatisfactory.

      And we hope for Avos .... Perhaps Avos will carry.

      Unfortunately it will not carry.
  • Yarbay
    Yarbay 27 August 2012 09: 53 New
    -1
    Apparently Rogozin has his own personal interest!
    Why it will promote this particular machine, and others how so ??
    1. kotdavin4i
      kotdavin4i 27 August 2012 09: 56 New
      +4
      Peppy morning Alibek ... well, maybe he really likes her? and how it stands, and it has its own niche in modern combat ... but in general it has a lot to use - from stationary roadblocks and escorting convoys in threatened directions - to a direct clash with the enemy without tanks ....
      1. Yarbay
        Yarbay 27 August 2012 10: 18 New
        +2
        Quote: kotdavin4i
        and she has her own niche in modern combat.

        Cheerful dear Alexander!))
        I don’t argue, just seeing what they’re doing with Russia, its army and the military-industrial complex in recent years, that I don’t believe in the human * like * among officials!
  • kotdavin4i
    kotdavin4i 27 August 2012 09: 53 New
    +1
    Полностью поддерживаю Рогозина - действительно отличная техника. хорошая огневая мощь (тем более что большие танковые сражения уже вряд ли произойдут в будуюшем) а со всякой "мелкотой" вроде того Кентавра он справиться за милую душу. Еще бы ему компактный беспилотник для лучшего обзора поля боя - была бы вообще сказка....
    1. wax
      wax 27 August 2012 13: 25 New
      0
      Tank destroyer - this, I think, is promising. But such a machine, by definition, should see beyond the tank and have means of guaranteed destruction of tanks at greater distances than the tank. It follows that anti-personnel weapons are redundant, with the exception of a machine gun for self-defense of the crew, because the machine will be immediately destroyed with a closer contact of the troops. The machine must integrate with surveillance equipment (including drones) of the army. Need maneuverability and maneuverability, as well as a decent amount of ammunition and rate of fire.
      1. leon-iv
        leon-iv 27 August 2012 13: 40 New
        0
        And why are OBPS not suitable for a 125mm long elongation gauge?
  • baltika-18
    baltika-18 27 August 2012 09: 59 New
    +1
    Good news, because I myself liked this machine very much. I was extremely upset when I found out that it wasn’t accepted for service.
  • Mitzhel
    Mitzhel 27 August 2012 09: 59 New
    0
    Если машина действительно хорошая и востребованна то её не проблема продать на внешнем рынке. Только чего-то покупатели не торопятся с заказами. Все больше "восхищаются" на выставках... кроме Казахстана купившего несколько штук пока покупателей нет.
  • Procurement officer
    Procurement officer 27 August 2012 10: 03 New
    -1
    Something did not make out grenade launchers :(
  • Mitzhel
    Mitzhel 27 August 2012 10: 05 New
    0
    Quote: Supply Manager
    Something did not make out grenade launchers :(


    in the front of the fenders ...
  • viruskvartirus
    viruskvartirus 27 August 2012 10: 12 New
    +3
    Машина спорная ...к ней масса весьма логичных замечаний...например курсовые гранатометы "До сих пор не потерявший актуальности во многих областях военной науки опыт Второй мировой войны показал, что применение курсового вооружения в боевых условиях малоэффективно и ведет лишь к повышенному расходу боеприпасов." и ради них в экипаж введены два дополнительных человека. НЕЗАЩИЩЕННЫЙ ПТРК, да и есть сомнения в достаточной эффективности по танкоопасным целям 30 мм пушки подробнее здесь http://vadimvswar.narod.ru/ALL_OUT/TiVOut0507/ABMPT/ABMPT001.htm
    In general, from the fact that I read the specialists converge in one BMPT, as the kind you need, it remains to do it ...
    1. Windbreak
      Windbreak 27 August 2012 10: 27 New
      +1
      btvt.narod.ru/3/bmpt_future/bmpt_future.htm here is another good article
      1. viruskvartirus
        viruskvartirus 27 August 2012 10: 45 New
        0
        Вот собственно и весь ответ на статью "К сожалению, несостоятельность конструкторских разработок ОАО УКБТМ продемонстрированная в данном материале на примере БМПТ компенсируется активной рекламной компанией в СМИ, где любые объективные высказывания с критикой их продукции оцениваются как антипатриотичные. "
        1. vorobey
          vorobey 27 August 2012 10: 55 New
          +3
          Quote: viruskvartirus
          design failure


          you are wrong.
          1. viruskvartirus
            viruskvartirus 27 August 2012 12: 04 New
            0
            Notice I cited a quote from the article ... if not right read and write why. Generally I think that the appearance of the BMPT is only being formed ... there is a discussion, your defense ministry is very interested in Kornet-D and there is infa that it will be on the TBMP being developed ... there is an interesting infa on the 57 mm gun ...
  • SSR
    SSR 27 August 2012 10: 36 New
    +4
    Да судя по всему эта машина предназначается для того.. что бы во время выполнения задачи (танкистами) танки не отвлекались на второстепенные цели... и что бы гранатометчиков и других шелудивых брал на себя "Терминатор".
    PS.
    I think that it’s our military who still don’t quite understand how it will look in real conditions ..
    but I think in a wooded area where you can make a bunch of ambushes
    the terminator would be very helpful (I recall 08.08.08 when the general was wounded, I think there wouldn’t have hurt such a machine either, due to his maneuverability and the ability to quickly respond to the target)
    1. viruskvartirus
      viruskvartirus 27 August 2012 11: 01 New
      +1
      )) вопрос... только какую цель считать второстепенной...расчет РПГ, ПТУР...и бороться только с бронетехникой...и остается принципиально важный вопрос борьбы с вертолетами...уж они то, как показала практика, штука страшная..."терминатор был бы очень кстати (вспоминается 08.08.08 когда генерал был ранен, думаю и там такая машина не повредила бы, за счет свое маневренности и возможностью быстрей отреагировать на цель)" тут с Вами и спорить никто не будет...но все дело в том что ставится вопрос о том что машины есть недостатки и есть варианты которые были бы эффективнее...ведь запуск машины в серию вещь очень дорогая...
      1. SSR
        SSR 27 August 2012 11: 09 New
        0
        вот вот и это должны "определить" военные, имеющие реальный опыт и имеющие реальные знания о современных средствах поражения бронетехники и о современных средствах противодействия таким системам,
        conduct competent computer simulation (then full-scale) and put the finally formed machine into the troops.
        chaotic .. but I'm not special to speak beautifully))
        just as I understand it .. the same ATGM has the time for putting into combat readiness and time for opening fire .. still, the terminator should find out faster and respond quicker or nafik needs a turtle.
        1. Per se.
          Per se. 27 August 2012 21: 00 New
          +1
          БМПТ интересна уже тем, что сделана на танковой базе, как "Мста" и "Буратино", по сути, это уже платформа, где нет только тяжелого БТР. Пару таких "Терминаторов" в Сирию на обкатку, а после видно будет, чего она стоит. Возможно, это танки в дальнейшем будут её поддерживать в бою, а не она их.
  • nnnnnnnnn
    nnnnnnnnn 27 August 2012 10: 49 New
    +3
    Hello everyone, let's see what will happen and how Rogozin will do it. Kazakhstan has adopted and so far there are no problems with them.
    1. kotdavin4i
      kotdavin4i 27 August 2012 11: 14 New
      +1
      That acquired and delivered well done. what about a run in it? Running opportunities leave no doubt, but did you try to shoot at it with goals and shoot at it?
    2. UzRus
      UzRus 27 August 2012 11: 16 New
      0
      And what kind of problems could there be if you only took them into service and did not participate in hostilities?

      And what kind of problems could there be if you only took them into service and did not participate in hostilities?
    3. marshes
      marshes 27 August 2012 11: 20 New
      +8
      This is an article by Gur Khan:
      Удивительно и не постижимо! Казахстан является не только самым близким соседом России, стратегическим партнером по Содружеству Независимых Государств, но и одним из самых перспективных покупателей нашей военной техники. В тоже время, создается впечатление, что руководители наших оборонных предприятий, "Рособоронэкспорта", "Ростехнологий" абсолютно не заинтересованы в продаже тяжелой бронетанковой техники в Казахстан. Во всяком случае такой вывод можно сделать, ознакомившись с экспонатами KADEX-2012. Дело в том, что на вставке нет ни одного российского образца тяжелой БТТ. На казахскую выставку "Уралвагонзавод" не привез ни свой самый топовый продукт - модернизированный танк Т-90МС, не представил модернизированный Т-72, даже "обычного" Т-90С и то нет! Правда есть ТОС-1 и БМПТ, но обе эти машины взяты на выставку уже из Казахской армии, где проходят опытную эксплуатацию.
      It is interesting that both of these machines are different from the original samples demonstrated in Russia. So the TOS-1 combat vehicle is made on the chassis of the T-90S tank and has built-in dynamic protection and a more powerful - 1000-horsepower diesel engine.
      With BMPT, things are even more interesting! First demonstrated at the parade in Astana in 2011, this fire support vehicle from the Kazakh army has significant differences from the UVZ exhibition model. Then, for some reason, no one paid attention to it - but in vain!
      Let's start with the little things:
      -перед смотровым прибором механика-водителя на носовом модуле ДЗ "Реликт" сделаны пулеотбойные планки по типу таковых на питерском модернизированном танке "объект 219М" [1];
      - at the stern there are additional ZiP boxes [2];
      - changed the design (ototehnologichna?) combat module [3];
      - стандартные гусеницы Т-90 вместо гусениц с "косым" грунтозацепом на опытном варианте БМПТ [4]
      And now the most important thing:
      - заменен панорамный прицел [5] - вместо панорамного прицела БО7К1 с низкоуровневым телевизионным каналом, с лазерным дальномером установлен панорамный прицел с тепловизионным каналом, аналогичный прицелу модернизированного танка Т-90МС. Тем самым "выбита почва из под ног критиков", критиковавших СУО БМПТ за отсутствие ТПВ-канала в панораме.
      The internal filling of BMPT has also undergone changes:
      - video viewing devices on a CRT are replaced by the APU GUI (plasma panels);
      - a system of interobject interaction was established
      - A new driver control panel and an improved BAS-6M engine control system.
      1. SSR
        SSR 27 August 2012 11: 32 New
        0
        which, in fact, is what we’re talking about ... our military has everything most advanced ..
        even medicine pulls teeth through the ass ..
        all the most advanced ..
        и как всегда.. обсуждается например один "терминатор" в войска может притопать абсолютно другая машина.. тот же "терминатор" но добавятся букоффки типа "терминатор"ЧУ (чрезвычайно угрожающий ))). и на выхлопе будет абсолютно другая по возможностям машина.
        eh .. it remains only to wait .. when additional information appears ..
      2. wolverine7778
        wolverine7778 27 August 2012 19: 00 New
        0
        our marshes took them three units, but BMPT protection is clearly not enough, it’s easy to shoot it in the conditions of the city, it’ll be no work at all. But such a question, if the Terminator is so beautiful, then what the hell is the whole world producing nothing like that and is not arming its armies? How are they with their tanks, infantry fighting vehicles, armored personnel carriers, Mraps and so on. do without this car? Unhappy eee!
        1. marshes
          marshes 27 August 2012 20: 18 New
          0
          Quote: wolverine7778

          our swamps took them three units,

          It is planned to buy more .... So I got information that we have T-80U tanks in service, the quantity is also in question.
          And Mr. Gur Khan, in my opinion an expert in tank matters, is interested in the Semipalatinsk Tank Repair Plant (the repair line was bought from Ukraine, Lviv.) And in cooperation with Israeli companies.
          АСТАНА, 17 апр - ИА Новости-Казахстан. Казахстан подал заявку на покупку второй партии боевых машин поддержки танков "Терминатор" у российского "Уралвагонзавода", сообщил во вторник заместитель генерального директора "Рособоронэкспорта" Виктор Комардин журналистам во вторник на оружейной выставке DSA-2012 в Куала-Лумпуре.
          According to him, Kazakhstan was the first state in the world to send an application to Russia for the purchase of a batch of Terminator tank support vehicles. The first batch of "Terminators" in the amount of three units has already been delivered to Kazakhstan.
  • strannik595
    strannik595 27 August 2012 10: 50 New
    0
    Боевая машина "Терминатор" - моя первая любовь......дай Бог чтобы первая любовь Рогозина и Терминатора принесла свои хорошие, достойные плоды и не только в Южной Африке! laughing
  • toguns
    toguns 27 August 2012 11: 54 New
    0
    drinks competent public relations of his products is the key to successful trading, Rogozin perfectly understands this for him a huge plus.
  • The comment was deleted.
  • Darck
    Darck 27 August 2012 12: 33 New
    0
    I understand that this Terminator will be used as the Americans Bradley to support tanks ... it is bad that he has laser-guided missiles.
  • leon-iv
    leon-iv 27 August 2012 12: 45 New
    +2
    Tell me, why do we need it in this form?
    Perhaps on the basis of Almaty, and it will be interesting if the BO process.
    And if the staff of heavy brigades introduce TBMP with a combat module 57/45 (telescopes) -mm 14,5 and 7,62 + ATGM + AGS. What will it be worse + transportation of drugs,
  • romb
    romb 27 August 2012 13: 34 New
    0
    For me, it makes more sense to make such a machine based on heavy armored personnel carriers, such as the Israeli intention. At the same time, reducing the crew to at least four people and adding an airborne squad, you can get a very interesting and most importantly needed car. Let's see what Armata with Kurgan will be like. It is possible that the RF Ministry of Defense has not yet said its last word.
  • Nechai
    Nechai 27 August 2012 14: 06 New
    +6
    Quote: vorobey
    . There is simply no sensible peasant in MeO who could clearly fit her into the framework.

    Sasha, now apparently no longer - negative selection in all its glory. And everything was already painted a long time ago. Take (at least many times already wrote about this) at least the open work of Marshal of the Armored Forces Oleg Alexandrovich Losik. May the Earth rest in peace to him, may the Kingdom of Heaven come to him! The complex of armored weapons - the theory of application, the technical task for the creation was laid down in the Marshal Ogarkov re-equipment program. Built and put into production operation in Ishimbayaya and Sterlitomak. The modernization of existing productions was carried out. Yes, sending a disaster ....
    The idea is very beautiful, from all points of view and positions, beyond praise. BTT battlefields of the first and second lines at the same base, differ in the degree of reservation and the power of one type of engine size, the nuances of the chassis.
    1st line = main tank + BMPT
    2я линия = ЗСУ "Катунь" + МСТА
    3я линия = транспортёры "Витязь" и машины различного предназначения на их базе. (Штаб, Связь, РЛС, Тыл).
    Система интегрирована. Каждая машина спциализирована под свой круг задач, но может в соответствующие моменты привлекаться, для усиления воздействия на противника в помощь той или иной машине выполняющей иные задачи, по её считай целеуказанию и управлению. Если коротко. И БМПТ органически вписывается в сию систему. Каждый её экипаж одномоментно может, исползуя как своё вооружение, так и привлекаемые из своей "2й линии", средства усиления старшего командира, уничтожать минимум ЧЕТЫРЕ ЦЕЛИ, на дальностях прямой видимости.
    But the embodiment of everything conceived, you yourself understand such a STOP CRANE included! For the SYSTEM was developed specifically for INCREASING THE MILITARY POSSIBILITIES of our State in the conditions of passing a demographic hole, with a significant reduction in the cost of maintaining the aircraft, after their rearmament.
    Для себя прикинь насколько возратёт мощь такой "танковой роты", батальона!
    The picture was rotated 180 degrees - already adversaries would have had to go to our battalion, for any to throw no less reinforced their brigade ....
    1. leon-iv
      leon-iv 27 August 2012 14: 16 New
      0
      And what is the real question?
      What is being transferred to unified platforms now is it really bad?

      And let's try to compare BMPT and TBMP with tank armor in NLD and VLD and a complex of weapons that I indicated above.
    2. vorobey
      vorobey 27 August 2012 14: 16 New
      +2
      Valera what to talk about?

      I started to get tired.
      1. leon-iv
        leon-iv 27 August 2012 15: 20 New
        +1
        Valera what to talk about?
        For example, why do we need BMPT if We need TBMP and New tanks on a single platform.
  • Aleks tv
    Aleks tv 27 August 2012 14: 21 New
    +4
    I really liked the BMPT when she "worked" on the tank director of the Staratel training ground in Nizhny Tagil. Truly a "sea of ​​fire." BZO carried the targets into chips.

    The concept of the car is very interesting.
    What I like about her: the presence of numerous light weapons on a tank platform. Those. it is no longer a tin can. Such an assistant is very necessary for the tank both in the "big" war on the field and in battle in urban conditions.

    What I don’t like: the concept of “stripping” the battlefield from grenade launchers using exchange rate grenade launchers it will be difficult to make. On-the-go weapons, on the go, without two-plane, normal stabilization - it's just spraying lead in all directions. And most importantly: the Terminator lacks the presence of mother infantry ... If there was a landing squad, it would turn out ... a wonderful heavy BMP based on a tank.

    In my opinion, if according to "Armata" they will make BMPs based on the tank with weapons reminiscent of BMPTs (and not just "thirty" in the forehead), then the Terminator is not needed. If they don’t, then it’s needed.

    Quote: Nechai
    And everything was already painted long ago. Take (at least many times already wrote about this) at least the open work of Marshal of the Armored Forces Oleg Alexandrovich Losik. May the Earth rest in peace to him, may the Kingdom of Heaven come to him! The complex of armored weapons - the theory of application, technical specifications for the creation was laid down in the Marshal Ogarkov re-equipment program.


    Exactly. Straight salt to the wound ...
  • Nechai
    Nechai 27 August 2012 15: 00 New
    +3
    Quote: Aleks tv
    On-the-go weapons, on the go, without two-plane, normal stabilization - it's just spraying lead in all directions.

    Алексей, обратите внимание на такие слова в данной заметке: "Также машина вооружена двумя stabilized дистанционно управляемыми автоматическими гранатометами АГ-17Д." Прежние демострируемые образцы - экпортный вариант, с нестабилизированными, управляемыми в ручную гранатомётами. Да вобщем-то, они НЕ ГЛАВНЫЙ "рабочий инструмент" двух "абулдуев", что сидят справа и слева от мех. вода. Их задача - селекционировать супостата на всю видимую глубину на поля боя и поражать его "удалённым доступом" иными системами вооружений.
    К вопросу о "матушке пехоте" - мой личный взгляд - нельзя объять необъятное! Вспомните сколько усилий было затраченно перед войной на создание универсальной пушки. Мотострелкам необходима собственная машина, возможно на той же базе основного танка в "тяжёлых бригадах". Свой собственный МСБ, 4х-5ти ротного состава, а возможно с два МСБ в бригаде. Считать, моделировать, отрабатывать на эксперементальных учениях надо. При необходимости, после того как своя броне армада пройдёт сковозь боевые порядки супостата, они- мотострелки будут проводить окончательную зачистку района. Или вставать щитом при атаках врага, давая возможность нанести уму хуки слева и справа. Как немчины в начале ВОВ поступали.
    1. leon-iv
      leon-iv 27 August 2012 15: 07 New
      0
      Nechai
      Let's think about whether the AG-17 can provide guaranteed defeat for enemy infantry in SIBZ.
      And 30mm with her weak OFS?
  • DIMS
    DIMS 27 August 2012 15: 05 New
    -1
    Interestingly, Rogozin will be able to figure out why this meaningless machine to the troops?
  • FID
    FID 27 August 2012 15: 25 New
    +2
    Interestingly, but someone Kholmansky is not from this enterprise?
    1. leon-iv
      leon-iv 27 August 2012 15: 41 New
      0
      Exactly like the beginning shop
  • Magadan
    Magadan 27 August 2012 15: 25 New
    +3
    Quote: Alexander Romanov
    To the question of not long discussed that private traders and businesses have nothing to do in the defense industry.

    Private owners in the defense industry do not FIG here you are right! In the USSR, the defense industry was 100% state-owned. As a result, we, having a population several times smaller than the west and tens of times less money than the west, created weapons models a cut above the western ones.
    Maybe I'm wrong about something? Maybe, finally, supporters of the Western private defense system will give examples of weapons that were better than soviet?
    Тастник let Coca-Cola does and cheburechnye opens. In high military technology, where the main thing not profit, and the defense of the homeland - do not FIG.
    And we all loser western experience impose. Here if the M-16 would be better than the AK-47, at a lower price, one would think. Well, either there Abrams would be cooler than the T-72, or Patriot better than the S-300. And then it turns out that the NATO people had a billion people and their aggregate GDP was tens of times more and they spent much more on the defense industry than we did, but where is the result of all these efforts? And time no resulteither they are without exception morons or their system is bad It is in this area.
    And now we are learning this system from them.
    1. bye
      bye 27 August 2012 15: 29 New
      +2
      Quote: Magadan
      Private owners in the defense industry do not FIG here you are right!

      It’s just that a private trader is ready to sell his products to everyone for the sake of profit, without taking into account the political component ... The state will never sell weapons to adversary countries and will, even to the detriment of the economic component, arm its allies, even to its own detriment
      1. Alexander Romanov
        Alexander Romanov 27 August 2012 15: 45 New
        +2
        Quote: bye

        Just a private trader for the sake of profit is ready to sell his products to everyone, without taking into account the political component

        But it’s interesting, where is one gentleman who suggested transferring the defense industry to private owners, why he is not participating in the discussion, belay probably it’s not profitable - they will zamusutuyut.Partnik thinks first of all about his pocket. And the defense of the state will not interest him even in the case of warriors. He will not think about the homeland, but about profit and about his savings in offshore. The defense sector should be public with all the consequences and only the state can guarantee the workers the entire social component.
        1. bye
          bye 27 August 2012 15: 54 New
          0
          Quote: Alexander Romanov
          The defense sector must be state-owned with all the consequences, and only the state can guarantee the workers the entire social component.

          Securing secrets can also be provided only by the state, this is beyond the power of security companies. Only the state, taking into account the level of access, can limit the travel of a person and his contacts ...
    2. leon-iv
      leon-iv 27 August 2012 15: 34 New
      +1
      As a result, we, having a population several times smaller than the west and tens of times less money than the west, created weapons models a cut above the western ones.
      But that's the thing. In the USSR, a very large sector of the economy somehow worked for the defense industry. Only here the people did not have enough banal things such as clothing shoes, etc., etc. Ask what is it like buy condoms? And when they gave a carrot in the form of consumer goods, the people put on bright ideals.
      PS This is not the main reason for the fall of the USSR is one of many.
      Maybe, finally, supporters of the Western private defense system will give examples of weapons that were better than the Soviet ones?
      Communication systems
      Fleet here You can argue for a long time, but NATO's fleet was more balanced and versatile.
      Naval Aviation.
      1. bye
        bye 27 August 2012 15: 46 New
        +2
        Quote: leon-iv
        Only here the people did not have enough banal things such as clothing shoes, etc., etc. Ask what is it like buy condoms?

        Разутый и раздетый никто не ходил, вещи выглядели не очень красиво, но были из натуральных материалов и служили долго. Презиками по 2 коп. были завалены все аптеки, вот покупать их было "стыдно"
        1. leon-iv
          leon-iv 27 August 2012 16: 02 New
          0
          Swollen and undressed, no one went, things didn’t look very beautiful, but they were made from natural materials and served for a long time.

          Yeah and even they all wanted Levis jeans and an imported tape recorder. Suddenly yes?
          Презиками по 2 коп. были завалены все аптеки, вот покупать их было "стыдно"
          It depends on which city.
          1. bye
            bye 27 August 2012 16: 07 New
            0
            Quote: leon-iv
            Yeah and even they all wanted Levis jeans and an imported tape recorder. Suddenly yes?

            Жил в приволжском городке, про "Левис" не мечтали, джинсы за сто рублей можно было приобрести, мне в 8-м классе (1981 г) сестра привезла из Германии (муж офицер в ГСВГ, фетиша не было) гораздо больше друзья завидовали ножу с ручкой из оленьей ноги
            Quote: leon-iv
            It depends on which city.

            Volsk city, Saratov region
        2. Pimply
          Pimply 27 August 2012 17: 03 New
          -1
          I doubt that you remember Soviet clothing, especially about serving for a long time. Often broke, torn, and the quality was below the baseboard. Do you think why everyone was chasing after Yugoslav boots, Gadear walls and Finnish socks? Yes, still everyone was just dragging themselves away from tape recorders Electronics and inedible blue hens. Chicken is a bird of happiness. Why? Because blue and you’ll find horseradish
      2. Alexander Romanov
        Alexander Romanov 27 August 2012 15: 49 New
        0
        Quote: leon-iv
        Maybe, finally, supporters of the Western private defense system will give examples of weapons that were better than Soviet

        I am not a supporter of the Western model, but I can’t ignore the successes and quality of weapons of the same NATO and the USA. And as far as I remember, you said quite recently that there will be no warriors in the next ten years, it’s a pity that you’ll be up recently about the possibility of warriors did not take part.
      3. FID
        FID 27 August 2012 15: 56 New
        +3
        Excuse me, what about naval aviation? Which of the possible opponents did she have better?
        1. bye
          bye 27 August 2012 16: 00 New
          -1
          Quote: SSI
          But what about naval aviation? Which of the possible opponents did she have better?

          Sergei, not special, but it seems to me that countries that have aircraft carriers in service in this direction have priority. By the way, during the WWII, the Germans were ahead of us and significantly, ours, due to Lend-Lease, could only resist IMHO (I can be mistaken very much, amateur :)
        2. leon-iv
          leon-iv 27 August 2012 16: 05 New
          0
          Excuse me, what about naval aviation? Which of the possible opponents did she have better?
          I meant carrier-based fighters. The USSR only at the end began to think about it and created an excellent aircraft under an unsuccessful carrier.
          For example, the same AWACS for AB would be sawed for a long time.
          1. FID
            FID 27 August 2012 16: 13 New
            +2
            Deck Yes. The exception is the Yak-141, who did not live up to the series. There were no analogues and no!
        3. Alexander Romanov
          Alexander Romanov 27 August 2012 16: 13 New
          0
          Quote: SSI
          Sorry

          Forgive laughing .
          Quote: SSI
          Which of the possible opponents was she better

          This is where the whole golovnyachka comes from. We are talking about the present time and we have quite a few problems. And as regards your question, in the old days, power would have been enough to smudge all of NATO together with the amers. And today to argue about what is no longer it just doesn't make sense request
          1. bye
            bye 27 August 2012 16: 15 New
            0
            Quote: Alexander Romanov
            Forgive

            Quote: Alexander Romanov
            And what about your question with us in the old days

            Сань, "охолонь" единственный профессионал остался... Сбавь тон, не нам дилетантам спорить со специалистом...
            1. Alexander Romanov
              Alexander Romanov 27 August 2012 16: 22 New
              0
              Quote: bye
              . Reduce the tone, it’s not for us amateurs to argue with a specialist.

              Dumyashutku man will understand wink And as for the dispute, it’s about something else about the terminator, someone believes that it is not needed. And I did not think about the professionalism and power of the USSR, only all this is already in the past request
              1. FID
                FID 27 August 2012 16: 29 New
                +1
                Of course I understand! I respect the interlocutors and understand that in some areas I am a specialist, but in others an amateur-amateur.
            2. FID
              FID 27 August 2012 16: 30 New
              +1
              Thank you for your support!
          2. FID
            FID 27 August 2012 16: 20 New
            +2
            Полностью согласен! Мы и живем пока на остатках и оборудовании советских разработок. Кто нибудь может привести примеры нынешних разработок, кроме "прорывного" супера и Роснановской "читалки" для детей за 12000?
            1. leon-iv
              leon-iv 27 August 2012 19: 17 New
              0
              For example, at the university I was engaged in optical processors based on single crystals. They say work lives and develops.
              Again, I note in the field of microelectronics http://www.mcst.ru/hardware.shtml with which in the USSR there was an extreme strain.
              And again, let's look at what kind of science is applied or fundamental.
    3. Pimply
      Pimply 27 August 2012 15: 37 New
      +1
      Do not forget that the USSR had the Warsaw Bloc, since you are considering the concept of the West separately.
      И, что удивительно, образцы вооружения "на голову выше западных"... Ну как сказать - далеко не всегда. Какие-то выше, какие-то ниже. Эффективность же экономики СССР, которая под грузом оборонки выдохлась
  • Aleks tv
    Aleks tv 27 August 2012 15: 37 New
    +1
    Quote: Nechai
    машина вооружена двумя стабилизированными дистанционно управляемыми автоматическими гранатометами АГ-17Д."


    Yes, Valery, the testers said that the AHs are stabilized on the “vertical”, this is of course already: a huge plus. That "horizontal" would ... but it will greatly increase the cost of the car.

    Quote: Nechai
    К вопросу о "матушке пехоте" - мой личный взгляд - нельзя объять необъятное!


    Of course I agree. That's right, balls ... I'm not a constructor.
    Principle of DESIRED:
    - tank
    -light tank-based weapons (BMPT),
    - infantry ... sheltered with tank (!!!) armor (I don’t even speak about attached units). It should be three separate cars or two unified: this is another question.

    Here it is necessary to create experimental equipment, to test it, to test it at the landfills ... I absolutely agree.

    If we consider everything “as it is now”, without thinking about “Almaty,” “Kurgan” and “boomerangs” (so far this is only on paper), then a BMPT platoon would not hurt the state of TR or, at worst, TB. (And they will not be superfluous to motorized rifles). Work for them would be unambiguous.
  • Manager
    Manager 27 August 2012 15: 39 New
    +1
    At the exhibition, he intends to promote his love and not in our troops ....... That's all lyuboff.
    1. leon-iv
      leon-iv 27 August 2012 15: 48 New
      0
      Then I will ask you a question.
      By what means will it destroy the enemy infantry.
      2A42 weak OFS action and not for this it was created but given the fact that the enemy infantry fighting vehicles / armored vehicles are heavier and hold 30mm
      PKMT is also not interesting because the ranges are not the same
      AG-17 is effective but not always + distribution of SIBZ.
      1. Manager
        Manager 27 August 2012 16: 34 New
        0
        Quote: leon-iv

        Then I will ask you a question.


        Why do I need it?)))
        In general, I wrote about the fact that in our troops we will see him in a row.
        1. leon-iv
          leon-iv 27 August 2012 19: 13 New
          +1
          In this form, it is not needed, I hope you understand this.
  • Aleks tv
    Aleks tv 27 August 2012 16: 25 New
    +5
    On the issue of the use of BMPT: I’m certainly not a strategist, only I reached the battalion commander, sorry ...

    In the city:
    You can’t put a tank ahead of the armored group, this is certain death. The tank in the city is certainly a monster, but a clumsy monster. What put forward? That's right, two cans in the form of BMP-2. And if you put BMPT? The street in front and the basements of houses on both sides will be cleared by course AGs, and the top floors will be cleaned by “thirty” (they rise high), and all this under the protection of TANK armor. Behind the "fist", if necessary, it will move forward and destroy to the ground what needs to be destroyed, and again will leave for BMPT. Mother Pyahota, as usual, hangs out around, BPM-2 behind the armored group for insurance and other tasks. Increases armor group survival? Of course. Would you refuse such a machine if you were offered it? Me not.

    In field:
    And what's wrong with that, all the "grass" with all the little things will be mowed in the trash BMPT in front of and around the tanks? And protected by tank armor? There is nothing wrong with that.

    In the mountains:
    Nice job: raised the "thirty" and ironing the slopes under the protection of tank armor.

    On the march:
    The sea of ​​small-caliber fire never hurts under the protection of tank armor when ambushed.

    “Thirty” would be replaced by 40-45mm (“potentially” peeling marders) ... hehe.

    Would you refuse such a machine? I would definitely not refuse yesterday and today. I don’t tell tales, I just really thought. I will not talk about the strategy for its application with foam at the mouth. We were waiting for her in the army. Would come in handy.
    We must protect the infantry ... Our mother.
    1. DIMS
      DIMS 27 August 2012 16: 30 New
      +1
      “Trodtsatka” would be replaced by 40-45mm (“marry” “potentially” to peel) ... hehe.

      But this is no longer in the rules of the Russian defense industry. You can buy only what is, especially since it has no analogues in the world.
      1. viruskvartirus
        viruskvartirus 28 August 2012 12: 16 New
        0
        Here is the news for you http://warfiles.ru/show-10747-predstavlyaem-noveyshaya-45-mm-avtomaticheskaya-pu
        shka-s-teleskopicheskim-boepripasom.html Russian 45mm telescopic shots ...
    2. viruskvartirus
      viruskvartirus 28 August 2012 12: 14 New
      0
      "«Тридцатку» бы на 40-45мм заменить" в этом и вопрос...плюс 40 мм АГ, плюс ПТРК такие которыми можно и вертолет достать...с Уважением!
  • Aleks tv
    Aleks tv 27 August 2012 16: 40 New
    0
    DIMS, Dmitry, yes “thirty” is quite enough (these are just potential balls), she can work at close range (if by chance such happiness happens), she takes down all sights and devices from the armor. Any Leclerc immediately turns into a pile of dead metal, not to mention the Marder.
    And so ... of course it is desirable to increase the caliber, if we are going to greet the external adversary.
    1. DIMS
      DIMS 27 August 2012 18: 10 New
      +2
      In any case, it must be increased. What will you do with the infantry in the trenches, shelling the course AGs? The capabilities of the machine are too far from necessary to start delivering it to the troops right now. After all, this is a very long time, armored vehicles do not change like shoes- went out of fashion and thrown out.
  • red 015
    red 015 27 August 2012 17: 51 New
    0
    a good thing. push it into the army
  • erased
    erased 27 August 2012 17: 55 New
    +1
    How much does this machine fit into the concept of creating the armed forces? Is it needed in this form? And it will be as usual - the technique was created, and the tactics and principle of its application are invented along the way. Waste of money, resources and nerves.
    I would like to make a mistake!
  • bask
    bask 27 August 2012 18: 23 New
    -2
    Well, we .. why reklit 90X. We blinded him from what it was. If you create a heavy armored personnel carrier, I would understand But this is not a BMP. But this is on ...... why. In a city battle .. it .. will not support not only tanks and infantry. she will last a minute. The crew in the nose visible front hemisphere and all. One shot from RPG 7 on an uninhabited tower and the car is blind. Everything in the MTO is okay. It’s okay if the crew can survive. But the experience of war has shown grenade launchers always work with snipers. Money is not needed, an infantry assault vehicle is needed. An armored tower-armored capsule for a commander with a periscope all-round visibility and so on. 152mm low-ballistic gun with 2 23mm antiaircraft guns. and so .. Yes MTO in the nose In the variant of BMP and armored personnel carrier And take the lush ... and the Armata Kurganians Boomerangs released 2012
  • Kolyan 2
    Kolyan 2 27 August 2012 19: 05 New
    0
    Ataturk (2) Today, 09:40 ↓ new 13
    Crammed by the most can not. There will be a good tank!




    I agree on armament is packed very well, firepower at the proper level.
  • Rossmk
    Rossmk 27 August 2012 20: 00 New
    0
    Interesting car, but practical useless. The tanks also have guided missiles, cannons for fighting infantry and weak armor, and from the helicopters they can perfectly cover the tungusks and shells. Then what for do you need a terminator?
  • Sober
    Sober 27 August 2012 20: 30 New
    0
    it's certainly all good! that they decided to return to the terminator! BUT! They also wanted to create BMPTs on the basis of Armata, and the question is, why return to the old version when the new one is already on the nose?
    1. DIMS
      DIMS 27 August 2012 20: 34 New
      +1
      Armata when there will be more ... But money is needed now. I will not be surprised if work on the new technology is not delayed for the sake of this.
  • His
    His 27 August 2012 20: 36 New
    0
    http://gurkhan.blogspot.com/2012/04/blog-post_6051.html
    A rather murderous article for the Terminator explaining why the military did not accept it
    1. Aeneas
      Aeneas 27 August 2012 21: 44 New
      0
      sorry, did not notice your link and duplicated repeat
  • Dimitr
    Dimitr 27 August 2012 20: 47 New
    0
    In my opinion, the statements are rather strange, there are a lot of words about foreign interests, about love, it is not clear which military men do not agree, and not one word about the possibility of adopting them!
  • Aeneas
    Aeneas 27 August 2012 21: 43 New
    +1
    Khlopotov, in his blog, published a critical article on the Terminator. Although Khlopotov is an apologist for UVZ http://gurkhan.blogspot.com/2012/04/blog-post_6051.html
  • Phase
    Phase 27 August 2012 21: 52 New
    +2
    Quote: Ataturk
    Crammed by the most can not. There will be a good tank!

    Ataturk, у меня к вам вопрос. Время публикации статьи - 9.38, время появления вашего комментария - 9.40. Вы действительно за 2 минуты статью прочитали? Завидую, мне бы этого времени не хватило. Хотя для того, чтобы найти поисковиком видео с "Терминатором" двух минут пожалуй достаточно. laughing

    Quote: bye
    Меня всегда смущает "лоббизм" в ВПК особенно, а тут он превращен чуть ли не в "героизм"... При всем уважении к Рогозину, как к чиновнику, я очень сомневаюсь в его знаниях в бронетехнике и знании современной тактики ведения БД.

    Именно это хотел написать. +1. Рогозин пока больше участвует в продвижении себя самого. И еще насторожило, что его желание продвигать эту машину базируется, оказывается, "на любви". А не на реальных требованиях нынешней тактики и принципов комплектования подразделений.

    Quote: Alexander Romanov
    And it will continue like this, even hunting is not a desire to write about it. A time has passed when the military made the decision on deliveries to the armed forces. At one fine point, some people realized that it was possible to make fortunes on the defense industry. private traders and businesses have nothing to do in the defense industry. We will buy not what is better, but what is more profitable.

    And again +1. Unfortunately.
  • suharev-52
    suharev-52 27 August 2012 23: 21 New
    0
    I read everything. Something you guys ganged up on a good car. In vain. For example, I would even get it for personal use. It’s a pity they don’t sell it, and don’t pull on finances. And it’s so expensive. He would have stood in my garden. I would have washed it, kicked it off and waited for the liberals with NATO to come to visit me. And then they would see what this car is worth. But seriously - the vesh in the troops is necessary. But only in combination with other equipment. And before that, to drive out the tests as close as possible to combat. Or send some samples to the conflict zone. And carefully consider all the wishes and comments expressed by the military. And to argue and criticize sitting at a computer, I think it’s not quite right. Only in combat conditions can a machine show its strengths and weaknesses to the maximum. And the troops are waiting for the Terminator. Sincerely.
  • shoroh
    shoroh 27 August 2012 23: 25 New
    +2
    I even registered for the occasion - a very important and necessary machine for the army! In my opinion, the idea of ​​a missile-cannon tank is very modern and necessary in the troops. Only the solution of this particular model leaves much to be desired.

    First: The requirements of modern combat - stealth in all ranges, from optical to infrared. Thus, a new stealth case is needed, using electromagnetic shielding, the maximum possible masking of thermal radiation, and most importantly, installing an active coating that changes color depending on the environment. The tank is a chameleon. There are technologies that are very simple - like electronic ink, which can change color depending on which side of the capsule the colored caps are. That is, it is realistic to make a coating that will completely repeat the environment, and possibly even in motion.

    The second - missile-cannon armament should be located in a well-protected tower, or partially located in the reserved volume. Thirty mm is what you need, it’s quite simple to improve the range and accuracy of fire using modern sighting systems.

    The reserved volume should be made as protected as possible - since there is no inhabited heavy tower, the saved weight should be used for additional protection of the crew. Let the car weigh 60 tons, but the crew should not feel in a punched box.

    The engine is located in the front, the crew is in a capsule, and the ammunition is separate, as is expected by modern technologies.

    And most importantly - to develop an effective anti-aircraft missile, to combat any flying targets, within a radius of 7-10 km. It would be nice to equip the four of these machines with a mini-drone for guiding missiles.
  • badervlad
    badervlad 27 August 2012 23: 25 New
    0
    Probably a useful car, that's a fact. The only thing I would like to understand is the strategy of our Armed Forces, from here comes the tactics of action, which is based on the capabilities of equipment and weapons, training personnel.
  • Nechai
    Nechai 27 August 2012 23: 46 New
    0
    Quote: suharev-52
    But seriously - the vesh in the troops is necessary. But only in combination with other equipment.

    Верно! Кроме внешнеполитического запрета на оснащение ТАКИМ комплексом бронетанкового вооружения наших ВС, присутствует и внутренний фактор в МО - не знание, не желание, боязнь проведения эксперементов - ведь не всё будет получаться с первого захода. Ведь по сути нужно создавать ранее не существовавшую систему КОМПЛЕКСНОЙ ПОДГОТОВКИ по сути ОБЩЕВОЙСКОВОГО бронетанкового подразделения, сохраняя и органично сопрягая с имеющимися методами обучения танкистов, артиллейристов, зенитчиков. "Родить" методику подготовки экипажей БМПТ, разработать и довести до совершенства алгоритмы взаимодействия, перенацеливания, конценрации и рассосредоточения огневой мощи. Тоесть вывести работу штаба батальона, бригады на иной более высокий и очень динамичный уровень. И как бы не возникла необходимость создания своего рода "штаба роты". В общем нужны на данную тему офицеры ЖЕЛАЮЩИЕ ИСКАТЬ и СПОСОБНЫЕ НАХОДИТЬ новые решения. Стремящиеся создать систему подготовки слаженного бронетанкового ОРКЕСТРА.
    For this, both simulator complexes and the Unified Training Fields are equipped, respectively, which were recently discussed on one of the branches.
    We need otherwise motivated commanders at all levels. Not thinking first of all about career take-off, to ensure his financial well-being.
    В коментах промелькнуло предложение увеличить калибр основного вооружения БМПТ. Судари, основной применяемый калибр экипажа данной колесницы от 120мм и выше. Включая системы залпового огня, тактические ракеты и т.п. А так же наведение армейской авиации. А то что уже стоит на ней, обеспечивает и собственную защиту и безопасность сопровождаемых танков и т.д. на средней и ближней дистанции от того, что может остаться после прохождения артиллейристско-авиационного стального "катка".
    1. DIMS
      DIMS 28 August 2012 00: 18 New
      0
      I don’t know how for rocket launchers or air corrector, but as a machine for advanced artillery observers BMPT is a complete ZERO
  • Mr. Truth
    Mr. Truth 28 August 2012 00: 47 New
    0
    ударное звено для тяжелых соединений должно быть в составе ОБТ-БМП (с 45 или 57 мм АП) для всех остальных (для нормальная пехота, легкая пехота на грузовиках "аэромобильная быстрая и летальная" , это для амеров- нарциссов, а я думаю спецназ или вертолетный полк или удар ОТР лучше этих нарциссов дело сделает) нужен ГУСЕНИЧНЫЙ БТР среднего класса, плавающий, с низким удельным давлением на грунт, простотой и технологичностью в производстве и обслуживании. Колеса пусть грузовикам и патрульным машинам останутся.
  • Evgen232
    Evgen232 28 August 2012 01: 54 New
    0
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jznxu8IIwII

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jznxu8IIwII
  • Vanek
    Vanek 28 August 2012 05: 55 New
    +1
    I may not understand something request (I am generally an amateur in these matters), but in my opinion only another tank can be better than a tank.
  • posad636
    posad636 28 August 2012 07: 06 New
    0
    "Терминатор" необходим. Прав Рогозин, что не слушает меднолобых генералов. Как известно, они у нас традиционно ничего из себя не представляют. Получают звания и должности путем накрывания столов, взяток, а то и подкладывая жен под вышестоящих начальников.
    Rogozin cleaned the High Command of the Navy, which generally planned to abandon the minesweepers! You imagine this: a fleet without minesweepers! Our ships could not get out of the Navy at all! Now everything is all right. Moreover, very interesting items are being adopted by the fleet, events are being held as a result of which the Americans will open their veins from grief.
    То же самое и с "Терминатором". Машина просто неоходима в бою для прикрытия танков. Она может и самостоятельно успешно противостоять противнику, как в обычном, так и танковом бою.
    I would like to wish one thing: it is necessary to strengthen the air defense component - without it in any way. Whether we like it or not, a helicopter against a tank is a formidable weapon.
    And, of course, running in combat conditions. It is necessary to develop tactics of application. This is a new direction for us. I am sure that other countries will go our way.
  • Strashila
    Strashila 28 August 2012 08: 44 New
    0
    The idea is good. The first thing that catches your eye is an unprotected combat model, open elements, it won’t protect you from fragments, I’m just silent about machine gun fire, they will spoil everything in seconds. the city on the upper floors. Let’s lose at a pace, but 30 mm would be preferable.
    1. posad636
      posad636 28 August 2012 09: 26 New
      0
      And what can suffer from splinters and bullets? Grenade launcher? Automatic guns? Missiles - yes, but where to hide them? It's impossible.
      30 мм - это то, что надо. Мне доволось побывать под "дружеским" огнем 30 мм пушки. Очень впечатлило.
      45 mm is preferable. And even more preferably 125 mm. So what? Rave!
      And in general, there are many theorists and keyboard heroes. It is necessary to immediately imagine who writes: sucker or a professional military man. So it will be better
  • AK-74-1
    AK-74-1 28 August 2012 09: 19 New
    0
    Не согласен с многими комментаторами. "Терминатор" вполне пригодна для решения полицейских задач. В боевой обстановке в составе БТГ, в боевых порядках мотострелковых и/или танковых рот бесполезная телега. По следующим причинам:
    small portable ammunition of guided missiles;
    weapons duplicating regular BMP and BMD;
    lack of remote detection systems;
    and most importantly, all external weapons - mounted type, in my opinion easily hit by large-caliber standard machine guns and rifles.
    В боевой порядок нужно ставить "Панцири", "Тунгуски" и "Шилки". При чем вся техника должна быть обеспечена системой обнаружения целей с БПЛА; должна быть единая система координации сил и средств на поле боя; отработанная система взаимодействия. Нужно понимать, что любые технические средства сделаны не в качестве самостоятельных средств ведения боя, а для поддержания "Царицы полей"- ПЕХОТЫ. А соответственно танковые, вертолетные, арт и зенитные подразделения обслуживают именно пехоту. Как показывает практика. Пехоте сейчас нужнее тяжелая БМП с противотанковой броней для обеспечения прорыва или устойчивости в обороне с современными средствами дистанционной разведки от радаров до БПЛА. А для действий в тылу противника легкая БМП типа БМД-4.
    1. posad636
      posad636 28 August 2012 09: 28 New
      0
      And who are you? An officer or just a computer drocher?
      1. AK-74-1
        AK-74-1 28 August 2012 10: 17 New
        0
        Вообще-то, среди комментаторов приветствуется обращение на "Вы". Во-вторых, частично о своей биографии я уже писал. В-третьих, могу считать себя почти танкистом, поскольку та рота, где я был подчинялась непосредственно командованию 1 ГвТА (непосредственные соседи 11 ГвТД). Также в силу работы в дальнейшем видел много материалов на тему создания БМПТ и почему закрыли интересную тему по "Дракону".
        Now, according to BMPT, the main weapon is a paired 30-mm cannon in a fully automated turret with anti-ballistic armor. The remaining weapons are mounted and automated. On the topic of BMPT there is an interesting study http://www.bibliofond.ru/view.aspx?id=520491.
        So now the issue of creating a new tank for the 152.4 mm gun, which will be with an AZ and the possibility of launching an SD, is being discussed.
        As a weapon of support for the units of the Internal Troops of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of the Russian Federation, terrorists and rebels will not have a good chance of resistance.
        1. posad636
          posad636 28 August 2012 10: 46 New
          0
          Давно так не смеялся!)))))))))))))) "могу считать себя танкистом...." (и космонавтом, а также гинекологом), " видел много материалов"..... КОШМАР!
          That's why I wrote that I need to introduce myself.
          I am a colonel. Member of 2 wars: 1985-87 - Afghanistan, 1989-1992 - South Ossetia. And who are you? NOBODY and should I read your nonsense?