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.
    Our news channels

    Subscribe and stay up to date with the latest news and the most important events of the day.

    153 comments
    Information
    Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
    1. Ataturk
      +16
      27 August 2012 09: 40
      Crammed by the most can not. There will be a good tank!

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

        I am always confused by "lobbying" in the military-industrial complex, especially, but here it is almost turned into "heroism" ... With all due respect to Rogozin, as an official, I very much doubt his knowledge of armored vehicles and knowledge of modern tactics of database management. The knowledge of the Terminator was poured into his ears by "managers from Uralvagon", acting on the principle "You cannot praise, you cannot sell" ...
        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.
        In the meantime, I personally see the "battle of lobbyists" and throwing from Italian wheeled vehicles to the "Terminator" with a glance at the Finnish technology :)
        1. +3
          27 August 2012 11: 54
          Quote: bye
          In the meantime, I personally see a "battle of lobbyists" and

          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. 0
            27 August 2012 14: 47
            Alexander Romanov,
            With both hands, I will support me, too, it is not clear how "comers" can be allowed to secrets request they are "a priori" focused on making money, and military secrets are oh what a liquid commodity. In addition, investing in promising developments will not soon pay off and whether it will pay off at all. It turns out that the state (you and I) will invest in the future, and private traders will cut coupons for the sale of equipment.
            1. GHG
              GHG
              +1
              28 August 2012 04: 36
              It came from them ... it seems like there is a concept, but there is a bobble in the details, why the car ... support the tank? Fight the air? There is "Tunguska", what really amazed him in the video? And the name is somehow Western.
          2. GHG
            GHG
            0
            28 August 2012 04: 17
            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. +4
          27 August 2012 12: 02
          Quote: bye
          In the meantime, I personally see the "battle of lobbyists" and throwing from Italian wheeled vehicles to the "Terminator" with a glance at the Finnish technology :)

          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
            0
            27 August 2012 12: 09
            Quote: vorobey
            in fact, BMPT in my opinion is promising

            Sasha, this is understandable ... But here we are talking about the open "promotion" of a specific model according to some kind of childlike method "Who is with me is a hero, and who is without me ..." From an official of this rank, I personally find it funny to hear such statements .. ...
            1. +6
              27 August 2012 12: 17
              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. +1
                27 August 2012 12: 23
                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
                +1
                27 August 2012 12: 27
                Quote: vorobey
                . Why can Sukhoi and UVZ not, that a bird of low flight?

                Sash, this is where the Superjet is in ... opera, thanks to Sukhoi, who, in order to "snatch the budget", engaged in development off-profile and with the "Terminator" it is not known what ... Tomorrow Putin will say that he likes "Terminator 2" (Omsk ) and that he will promote it, and Medvedev will declare that he likes Terminator 3 and will promote it .... It is not the business of officials to "lobby" the interests of individual enterprises IMHO
                1. +3
                  27 August 2012 12: 39
                  Quote: bye

                  Sash, this is where the Superjet is in ... opera, thanks to Sukhoi, who, in order to "snatch the budget", engaged in development outside the profile

                  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. +4
                  27 August 2012 12: 42
                  Quote: bye
                  It is not the business of officials to "lobby" the interests of individual enterprises IMHO


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

                  “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
                    +1
                    27 August 2012 12: 57
                    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.

                    Sash, I have to admit your truth. I really "superficially" read the news and missed this nuance. You're right !!!, I'm "FOR !!! Such a lobby !!!"
                    1. +1
                      27 August 2012 13: 00
                      I did it at first. But Rogozin keeps his word.

                      the truth, but not all of it.
                  2. not good
                    +2
                    27 August 2012 16: 13
                    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
                0
                29 August 2012 20: 36
                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
            +5
            27 August 2012 12: 17
            vorobey - Colleague, there were questions to this BMPT about weapons and crew size, but the fact that even without Rogozinsky "lobbying" Kazakhstan buys this equipment speaks in favor of this machine - in Kazakhstan, the army is equipped thoughtfully and without any "throwing" - buy what they think is necessary and this car came to the court.
            1. bye
              bye
              +3
              27 August 2012 12: 20
              Quote: Gogh
              in Kazakhstan, the army is equipped thoughtfully and without any "throwing" - they buy what they think is necessary and this machine came to the court.

              Oh! There they buy only for kickbacks, there are so many scandals with the purchase of equipment that other post-Soviet countries never dreamed of ...
              1. -1
                27 August 2012 13: 13
                Oh, I'll support it here. There were scandals, especially when one "recoiling" grouping ran into another ..
          3. -4
            27 August 2012 13: 11
            And how is it promising? Well, really - it's a rather pointless thing
            1. +1
              27 August 2012 13: 13
              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
              0
              27 August 2012 16: 17
              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. -2
              28 August 2012 03: 20
              tough killer of all
        3. -3
          27 August 2012 13: 09
          In principle, as an official, I also don’t really know what to respect for. For populism?
        4. black_eagle
          +2
          27 August 2012 14: 07
          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. +2
            27 August 2012 18: 20
            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
              +3
              27 August 2012 23: 25
              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
          +1
          27 August 2012 15: 12
          Quote: bye
          I am always embarrassed by "lobbying" in the military-industrial complex especially, but here it has been turned almost into "heroism" ...

          Support!
          Moreover, "Terminator", as far as I know, is a rather "raw" car. But as already said here, only full-scale military tests will be able to give the final answer - it is "necessary" or "not necessary" (BMPT) in the form proposed by the plant, and if "not necessary", then why (what needs to be corrected / add / etc.).
        6. beech
          +1
          27 August 2012 22: 51
          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
          0
          28 August 2012 04: 12
          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
          0
          29 August 2012 20: 32
          Quote: bye
          I am always confused by "lobbying" in the military-industrial complex, especially, but here it is almost turned into "heroism" ... With all due respect to Rogozin, as an official, I very much doubt his knowledge of armored vehicles and knowledge of modern tactics of database management. The knowledge of the Terminator was poured into his ears by "managers from Uralvagon", acting on the principle "You cannot praise, you cannot sell" ...

          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
        +3
        27 August 2012 13: 01
        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
          0
          27 August 2012 13: 14
          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. 0
          28 August 2012 04: 56
          For what purpose?
      3. in reserve
        +1
        27 August 2012 22: 29
        Useless thing.
      4. -1
        28 August 2012 00: 14
        just like footage from battlefield xnumx hehehe
      5. Evgen232
        0
        28 August 2012 02: 00
        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. 0
        28 August 2012 08: 35
        Not a bad harvester turned out with seeders and winders. He only sows panic at the enemy and dispels doubts and marsh moods.
    2. +7
      27 August 2012 09: 42
      "The Terminator combat vehicle is my first love, in the promotion of which I will personally take part," he said

      Let's see what your word weighs.
    3. +6
      27 August 2012 09: 45
      Maybe for a start we will "advance" into the troops?

      And then we only hear about foreign delegations
    4. +7
      27 August 2012 09: 46
      The Terminator fighting vehicle is my first love

      Love should be cherished "and, I hope, the machine deserves that Rogozin compel the" opponents "(and they certainly have, like any type of weapon - there are lobbyists) of this development. Only now I wonder whose unwillingness Rogozin overcomes and what his opponents are based on ?
      Immediately I want to preface possible verbal statements - give specific examples of the arguments of Rogozin's opponents in this case. Without chewing gum type - "Furniture", "Drank", etc.
      1. +5
        27 August 2012 10: 06
        BMPT "Terminator" - designed to combat tanks and other armored vehicles of the enemy

        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.
        Secondly, the BMPT simply will not be able to target them in order to shoot them down. There is no radar. And "manually" you will get figs.

        The Terminator is equipped with guided missile launchers with a firing range of up to 5 km.

        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. 0
          27 August 2012 10: 21
          yanusYes, the car is very ambiguous. With the same helicopters and low-flying targets, as well as other enemy armored vehicles, Tunguska and / or Pantsiri, for that matter, can fight successfully. Everything else - the tank itself can handle.
        2. 0
          27 August 2012 10: 48
          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
            0
            27 August 2012 23: 30
            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. +1
          27 August 2012 12: 08
          "To effectively counter attack helicopters and UAVs, it is necessary to have air defense systems directly in battle formations, since they carry out an attack or reconnaissance overflight at low altitudes, which does not allow them to be detected in time by medium and long-range air defense systems usually located deep in the rear.
          ATGM "Kornet-EM" is a complex capable of effectively solving such problems. "
          http://3mv.ru/forum/9-182-1
        4. 0
          28 August 2012 05: 01
          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
          0
          29 August 2012 20: 43
          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. +3
        27 August 2012 10: 15
        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)
        And despite the fact that "Uralvagonzavod" stated that the use of BMPT would be effective precisely in this direction, in fact, it belongs exclusively "on the battlefield."
        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.
        Well, returning to the anti-terrorist orientation of our Army and the sincere belief that the 21st century has closed the issue of the "big war" and opened the era of local wars and conflicts ... and created a conflict of interest.

        According to Serdyukov and his "Army anti-terrorist" there is no place for her in the Army.
        According to Rogozin and his opinion about the possibility of a "big war" and, as a consequence, the conduct of traditional hostilities, the Terminator is in great need in the Army.

        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. +2
          27 August 2012 10: 22
          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
          According to Serdyukov and his "Army anti-terrorist" she has no place in the Army

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

          Quote: volkan
          According to Rogozin and his opinion about the possibility of a "big war" and, as a consequence, the conduct of traditional hostilities, the Terminator is in great need in the Army.

          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. +3
            27 August 2012 10: 39
            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.
            And secondly, looking at the teachings of our Army over the past few years, one can only see the "fight against terror".

            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.

            For some reason, we began to be ashamed to say that this BMPT, for example, is designed to fight the Abrams or Leopards.
            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. +2
              27 August 2012 10: 48
              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. +1
                27 August 2012 10: 49
                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. +3
                  27 August 2012 10: 52
                  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. +4
                    27 August 2012 10: 55
                    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. +3
                      27 August 2012 11: 01
                      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. +3
                        27 August 2012 11: 07
                        ..All new, this is a well-forgotten old ..-- seems never to lose its relevance.
                    2. +2
                      27 August 2012 11: 33
                      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
                        -1
                        27 August 2012 14: 57
                        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. -1
                      27 August 2012 13: 16
                      To be honest, Andrei, I somehow do not see the point in this prodigy. That's honest.
                      1. DIMS
                        -1
                        27 August 2012 15: 02
                        Well, its sale will bring income.
                        1. -1
                          27 August 2012 15: 19
                          Well, maybe
                      2. +1
                        28 August 2012 12: 27
                        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. -1
                          28 August 2012 18: 40
                          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. 0
                          28 August 2012 18: 51
                          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. -1
                          28 August 2012 23: 37
                          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.

                          Once - in terms of firepower, I was really impressed by the "volcanoes" of the anti-aircraft gunners installed on the M113. They are just scary and they have a crazy rate of fire. This is a terrible thing, and one line is demolished by a small house.

                          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. 0
                          28 August 2012 23: 46
                          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
                          anti-aircraft gunners "volcanoes"

                          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. 0
                          29 August 2012 00: 12
                          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.

                          Makes beautiful holes like that. It also depends on the shells. But here, after such a small, two-minute treatment, the people went to surrender. Moreover, 10 handsome men - the so-called. "with blood on his hands." Scary thing, psychologically. Very scary.
                        6. 0
                          29 August 2012 12: 12
                          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. -1
                          29 August 2012 15: 36
                          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.

                          Here the relative cheapness. The same Merkava covered the shooters at night for 4 km. And the fig there is this machine-gun support? IMHO, it is necessary to develop the capabilities of tanks, and not to give them such "support", to make tanks more multifunctional and to develop methods of their protection.

                          And about Shilka - according to the recollections of the fighters who stormed Amin's palace, the shells of the Shilka bounced off the walls like nuts ...



                        8. 0
                          29 August 2012 15: 55
                          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
                          , who stormed the palace of Amin, shells "Shilka" bounced off the walls

                          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. 0
                          29 August 2012 18: 26
                          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. 0
                          29 August 2012 18: 35
                          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. -1
                          29 August 2012 19: 58
                          Andrey, you’ll say for all three options that this is not an 8 IFV)
                        12. 0
                          29 August 2012 20: 09
                          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. -1
                          30 August 2012 11: 18
                          No, 8 does not bother me) Just knowing your skepticism, I fear 8 in advance)))

                          In my opinion, both Namer and Akhzarit turned out to be quite successful cars. The serial version of the Namer will be equipped with the Rafael remote-controlled weapon module, which includes (in different versions) a 7,62-mm or 12,7-mm machine gun, a 30-mm mechanical cannon, and a 40-mm mechanical grenade launcher. Knowing the IDF (and having studied pictures 8), they will most likely install a 12.7 cannon or a 40mm grenade launcher. Plus double "Magicians"



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

                        14. 0
                          30 August 2012 16: 49
                          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. 0
                          30 August 2012 21: 29
                          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. 0
                          30 August 2012 21: 32
                          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. -1
                          30 August 2012 21: 34
                          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.
                        18. Karish
                          0
                          29 August 2012 20: 47
                          Quote: Pimply
                          Once - in terms of firepower, I was really impressed by the "volcanoes" of the anti-aircraft gunners installed on the M113. They are just scary and they have a crazy rate of fire. This is a terrible thing, and one line is demolished by a small house

                          Saw, During the operation * Protective wall * Under Jenin. Cut the floors with the arrows, like a knife. Scary thing.
                        19. 0
                          30 August 2012 11: 08
                          I had friends there, in 51st and 13th. I myself made the "Protective Wall" in Shechem
            2. 0
              27 August 2012 10: 57
              Quote: volkan
              So open and directly verbatim speeches I will not give you.


              I'm sorry

              Quote: volkan
              And secondly, looking at the teachings of our Army over the past few years, one can only see the "fight against terror".


              Andrey, this formulation of the names is a tribute to modern "fashion" in the era of the notorious over (FOR) load. The West, after all, conducts all the same exercises exclusively under the banner of the fight against international terror. And in times of info war, any zilch with a warlike name can only be interpreted as preparation for war. Good hypocrisy - on both sides.
              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. 0
                27 August 2012 11: 41
                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.
                From such stories there is a feeling of "the abnormality of what is happening."
                1. +2
                  27 August 2012 11: 52
                  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. +2
                    27 August 2012 12: 01
                    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.

                    I am trying to convey to Valery the idea that "it was smooth on paper, but they forgot about the ravines."
                    Apparently it doesn’t work out.

                    Despite the leaked materials in the media, the majority apparently still has before their eyes the "positive effect" of the reforms.

                    But for this reason, most of the officers "if not for the record" confidently believe that the defense capability "as a result of the reforms" has dropped significantly.
                    Well, this is also apparently due to the fact that they "do not have all the information"

                    This is me so no offense to Valery.
                    1. bye
                      bye
                      +1
                      27 August 2012 12: 06
                      Quote: volkan
                      I am trying to convey to Valery the idea that "it was smooth on paper, but they forgot about the ravines."

                      There is no use to convince, except for "Glory to Putin" the brain does not perceive anything ...
                      Quote: volkan
                      But for this reason, most of the officers "if not for the record" confidently believe that the defense capability "as a result of the reforms" has dropped significantly.
                      Well, this is also apparently due to the fact that they "do not have all the information"

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

                        Quote: volkan
                        I am trying to convey to Valery the idea that "it was smooth on paper, but they forgot about the ravines."
                        There is no use to convince, except for "Glory to Putin" the brain does not perceive anything ...


                        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
                          0
                          27 August 2012 12: 18
                          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.

                          The legacy of Soviet times ... It’s somehow strange, but the good Soviet traditions were successfully "fucked up", and the whole "gnu" somehow strangely took root in the new formation ...
                        2. +1
                          27 August 2012 12: 50
                          Andrei, I answered there above.
                          I repeat.
                          Quote: vorobey
                          scribe we are rams. We read one, understand the other.

                          Quotes
                          The Terminator combat vehicle is my first love, in the promotion of which I will personally take part, "he said today at a briefing at the Defense and Defense 2012 exhibition.

                          “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. +1
                          27 August 2012 14: 04
                          Quote: volkan
                          Maybe for a start we will "advance" into the troops?

                          And then we only hear about foreign delegations


                          yes, I also "hinted" above
            3. +1
              27 August 2012 15: 11
              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. -1
                27 August 2012 17: 58
                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.
    5. Yarbay
      -1
      27 August 2012 09: 53
      Apparently Rogozin has his own personal interest!
      Why it will promote this particular machine, and others how so ??
      1. +4
        27 August 2012 09: 56
        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
          +2
          27 August 2012 10: 18
          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!
    6. +1
      27 August 2012 09: 53
      I fully support Rogozin - a really excellent technique. good firepower (especially since big tank battles are unlikely to take place in the future) and he will cope with any "small thing" like that Centaur for a sweet soul. Still, he would have a compact drone for a better view of the battlefield - it would be a fairy tale ...
      1. wax
        0
        27 August 2012 13: 25
        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. 0
          27 August 2012 13: 40
          And why are OBPS not suitable for a 125mm long elongation gauge?
    7. +1
      27 August 2012 09: 59
      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.
    8. Mitzhel
      0
      27 August 2012 09: 59
      If the car is really good and in demand, then it is not a problem to sell it on the foreign market. But for some reason, buyers are in no hurry with orders. They are more and more "admired" at exhibitions ... except for Kazakhstan, which has bought several pieces, there are no buyers yet.
    9. Procurement officer
      -1
      27 August 2012 10: 03
      Something did not make out grenade launchers :(
    10. Mitzhel
      0
      27 August 2012 10: 05
      Quote: Supply Manager
      Something did not make out grenade launchers :(


      in the front of the fenders ...
    11. +3
      27 August 2012 10: 12
      The machine is controversial ... there are a lot of very logical comments to it ... for example, course grenade launchers "The experience of the Second World War, which has not lost its relevance in many areas of military science, has shown that the use of offensive weapons in combat conditions is ineffective and only leads to an increased consumption of ammunition . " and for their sake, two additional people were introduced into the crew. UNPROTECTED ATGM, and there are doubts about the sufficient efficiency of the 30 mm cannon against tank-hazardous targets, more details here 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
        +1
        27 August 2012 10: 27
        btvt.narod.ru/3/bmpt_future/bmpt_future.htm here is another good article
        1. 0
          27 August 2012 10: 45
          That's actually the whole answer to the article "Unfortunately, the inconsistency of the design developments of JSC UKBTM, demonstrated in this material by the example of BMPT, is compensated by an active advertising campaign in the media, where any objective statements criticizing their products are assessed as antipatriotic."
          1. +3
            27 August 2012 10: 55
            Quote: viruskvartirus
            design failure


            you are wrong.
            1. 0
              27 August 2012 12: 04
              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 ...
    12. SSR
      +4
      27 August 2012 10: 36
      Yes, apparently, this machine is intended ... so that during the mission (tankers) tanks are not distracted by secondary targets ... and that the Terminator would take over the grenade launchers and other scurvy.
      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. +1
        27 August 2012 11: 01
        )) the question ... just what goal is considered secondary ... the calculation of RPGs, ATGMs ... and to fight only with armored vehicles ... and the fundamentally important issue of fighting helicopters remains ... they are, as practice has shown, a terrible thing ... "the terminator would be very helpful (I recall 08.08.08 when the general was wounded, I think such a machine would not damage there either, due to its maneuverability and the ability to quickly respond to the target)" here no one will argue with you .. .but the whole point is that the question is raised that the machines have drawbacks and there are options that would be more effective ... after all, launching a car into a series is a very expensive thing ...
        1. SSR
          0
          27 August 2012 11: 09
          here and this must be "determined" by the military, who have real experience and have real knowledge about modern means of destruction of armored vehicles and about modern means of countering such systems,
          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. +1
            27 August 2012 21: 00
            The BMPT is interesting already because it was made on a tank base, like Msta and Buratino, in fact, it is already a platform, where there is only a heavy armored personnel carrier. A couple of these "Terminators" to Syria for a run-in, and then it will be seen what it is worth. Perhaps it is the tanks that will support her in battle in the future, and not she.
    13. nnnnnnnnn
      +3
      27 August 2012 10: 49
      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. +1
        27 August 2012 11: 14
        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. 0
        27 August 2012 11: 16
        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. +8
        27 August 2012 11: 20
        This is an article by Gur Khan:
        Amazing and incomprehensible! Kazakhstan is not only the closest neighbor of Russia, a strategic partner in the Commonwealth of Independent States, but also one of the most promising buyers of our military equipment. At the same time, one gets the impression that the heads of our defense enterprises, Rosoboronexport, and Rostekhnologii are absolutely not interested in selling heavy armored vehicles to Kazakhstan. In any case, such a conclusion can be made by familiarizing yourself with the exhibits of KADEX-2012. The fact is that there is not a single Russian model of a heavy armored vehicle on the insert. At the Kazakh exhibition "Uralvagonzavod" did not bring any of its top-end product - the modernized T-90MS tank, did not present the modernized T-72, even the "usual" T-90S is not! True, there are TOS-1 and BMPT, but both of these vehicles were taken to the exhibition already from the Kazakh army, where they are being tested.
        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:
        - in front of the driver's viewing device on the "Relikt" DZ bow module, bullet-breaker strips were made similar to those on the St. Petersburg modernized tank "Object 219M" [1];
        - at the stern there are additional ZiP boxes [2];
        - changed the design (ototehnologichna?) combat module [3];
        - standard tracks T-90 instead of tracks with "oblique" lug on the prototype BMPT [4]
        And now the most important thing:
        - the panoramic sight was replaced [5] - instead of the BO7K1 panoramic sight with a low-level television channel, with a laser rangefinder, a panoramic sight with a thermal imaging channel was installed, similar to the sight of the modernized T-90MS tank. Thus, "the ground was knocked out from under the feet of the critics" who criticized the BMPT JMA for the absence of a TPV channel in the panorama.
        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
          0
          27 August 2012 11: 32
          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 ..
          and as always .. for example, one "terminator" is being discussed, a completely different machine can hit the troops .. the same "terminator" but bukoffki like "terminator" CHU (extremely threatening))) will be added. and the exhaust will be a completely different car in terms of capabilities.
          eh .. it remains only to wait .. when additional information appears ..
        2. wolverine7778
          0
          27 August 2012 19: 00
          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. 0
            27 August 2012 20: 18
            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.
            ASTANA, April 17 - IA Novosti-Kazakhstan. Kazakhstan has applied for the purchase of the second batch of Terminator tank support combat vehicles from the Russian Uralvagonzavod, Deputy Director General of Rosoboronexport Viktor Komardin told reporters Tuesday at the DSA-2012 arms exhibition in Kuala Lumpur.
            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.
    14. 0
      27 August 2012 10: 50
      Fighting vehicle "Terminator" - my first love ...... God forbid that the first love of Rogozin and the Terminator bore good, worthy results and not only in South Africa! laughing
    15. toguns
      0
      27 August 2012 11: 54
      drinks competent public relations of his products is the key to successful trading, Rogozin perfectly understands this for him a huge plus.
    16. The comment was deleted.
    17. Darck
      0
      27 August 2012 12: 33
      I understand that this Terminator will be used as the Americans Bradley to support tanks ... it is bad that he has laser-guided missiles.
    18. +2
      27 August 2012 12: 45
      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,
    19. 0
      27 August 2012 13: 34
      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.
    20. Nechai
      +6
      27 August 2012 14: 06
      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
      2nd line = ZSU "Katun" + MSTA
      3rd line = conveyors "Vityaz" and vehicles for various purposes based on them. (Headquarters, Communications, Radar, Logistics).
      The system is integrated. Each machine is specialized for its own range of tasks, but can be involved at appropriate moments to enhance the impact on the enemy to help one or another machine performing other tasks, according to its target designation and control. In short. And BMPT organically fits into this very system. Each of its crews can simultaneously, using both their weapons and the means of strengthening the senior commander drawn from their "2nd line", to destroy at least FOUR TARGETS, at line-of-sight distances.
      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.
      For yourself, estimate how much the power of such a "tank company", a battalion, will return!
      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. 0
        27 August 2012 14: 16
        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. +2
        27 August 2012 14: 16
        Valera what to talk about?

        I started to get tired.
        1. +1
          27 August 2012 15: 20
          Valera what to talk about?
          For example, why do we need BMPT if We need TBMP and New tanks on a single platform.
    21. +4
      27 August 2012 14: 21
      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 ...
    22. Nechai
      +3
      27 August 2012 15: 00
      Quote: Aleks tv
      On-the-go weapons, on the go, without two-plane, normal stabilization - it's just spraying lead in all directions.

      Alexey, pay attention to these words in this note: "Also the car is armed with two stabilized remotely controlled automatic grenade launchers AG-17D. "The previous demonstration samples are an export version, with unstabilized, manually controlled grenade launchers. Yes, in general, they are NOT THE MAIN" working tool "of the two" Abulduis "that sit to the right and left of the mech. water Their task is to select an adversary for the entire visible depth on the battlefield and hit him with "remote access" with other weapons systems.
      On the question of "mother infantry" - my personal opinion - you cannot grasp the immensity! Remember how much effort was expended before the war to create a universal gun. Motorized riflemen need their own vehicle, possibly on the same base of the main tank in the "heavy brigades". Your own SME, 4-5 company composition, and possibly with two SMEs in the brigade. It is necessary to count, simulate, work out on experimental exercises. If necessary, after its armada has passed through the enemy's battle formations, the motorized riflemen will carry out the final clearing of the area. Or to stand up with a shield when the enemy attacks, making it possible to inflict hooks on the left and right to the mind. As the Germans did at the beginning of the Second World War.
      1. 0
        27 August 2012 15: 07
        Nechai
        Let's think about whether the AG-17 can provide guaranteed defeat for enemy infantry in SIBZ.
        And 30mm with her weak OFS?
    23. DIMS
      -1
      27 August 2012 15: 05
      Interestingly, Rogozin will be able to figure out why this meaningless machine to the troops?
    24. FID
      +2
      27 August 2012 15: 25
      Interestingly, but someone Kholmansky is not from this enterprise?
      1. 0
        27 August 2012 15: 41
        Exactly like the beginning shop
    25. +3
      27 August 2012 15: 25
      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
        +2
        27 August 2012 15: 29
        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. +2
          27 August 2012 15: 45
          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
            0
            27 August 2012 15: 54
            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. +1
        27 August 2012 15: 34
        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
          +2
          27 August 2012 15: 46
          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?

          No one walked in disguised and undressed, things did not look very beautiful, but they were made of natural materials and served for a long time. Preziki for 2 kopecks. all pharmacies were overwhelmed, so it was a shame to buy them
          1. 0
            27 August 2012 16: 02
            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?
            Preziki for 2 kopecks. all pharmacies were overwhelmed, so it was a shame to buy them
            It depends on which city.
            1. bye
              bye
              0
              27 August 2012 16: 07
              Quote: leon-iv
              Yeah and even they all wanted Levis jeans and an imported tape recorder. Suddenly yes?

              He lived in a Volga town, they didn’t dream about Levis, they could buy jeans for a hundred rubles, my sister brought me from Germany in the 8th grade (1981) (my husband was an officer in the GSVG, there was no fetish) much more friends envied the knife with reindeer leg handle
              Quote: leon-iv
              It depends on which city.

              Volsk city, Saratov region
          2. -1
            27 August 2012 17: 03
            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. 0
          27 August 2012 15: 49
          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
          +3
          27 August 2012 15: 56
          Excuse me, what about naval aviation? Which of the possible opponents did she have better?
          1. bye
            bye
            -1
            27 August 2012 16: 00
            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. 0
            27 August 2012 16: 05
            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
              +2
              27 August 2012 16: 13
              Deck Yes. The exception is the Yak-141, who did not live up to the series. There were no analogues and no!
          3. 0
            27 August 2012 16: 13
            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
              0
              27 August 2012 16: 15
              Quote: Alexander Romanov
              Forgive

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

              San, "oholon" is the only professional left ... Slow down, it's not for us amateurs to argue with a specialist ...
              1. 0
                27 August 2012 16: 22
                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
                  +1
                  27 August 2012 16: 29
                  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
                +1
                27 August 2012 16: 30
                Thank you for your support!
            2. FID
              +2
              27 August 2012 16: 20
              I completely agree! We still live on the remnants and equipment of Soviet developments. Can anyone give examples of current developments, except for the "breakthrough" super and the Rosnan "reader" for children for 12000?
              1. 0
                27 August 2012 19: 17
                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. +1
        27 August 2012 15: 37
        Do not forget that the USSR had the Warsaw Bloc, since you are considering the concept of the West separately.
        And, surprisingly, the samples of weapons are "a cut above the western" ... Well, how to say - not always. Some are higher, some are lower. The efficiency of the USSR economy, which was exhausted under the burden of the defense industry
    26. +1
      27 August 2012 15: 37
      Quote: Nechai
      the vehicle is armed with two stabilized remotely controlled automatic grenade launchers AG-17D. "


      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
      On the question of "mother infantry" - my personal opinion - you cannot grasp the immensity!


      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.
    27. +1
      27 August 2012 15: 39
      At the exhibition, he intends to promote his love and not in our troops ....... That's all lyuboff.
      1. 0
        27 August 2012 15: 48
        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. 0
          27 August 2012 16: 34
          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. +1
            27 August 2012 19: 13
            In this form, it is not needed, I hope you understand this.
    28. +5
      27 August 2012 16: 25
      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
        +1
        27 August 2012 16: 30
        “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. 0
          28 August 2012 12: 16
          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. 0
        28 August 2012 12: 14
        "Thirty would be replaced by 40-45mm" in this and the question ... plus 40 mm AG, plus anti-tank systems such that you can get a helicopter ... with respect!
    29. 0
      27 August 2012 16: 40
      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
        +2
        27 August 2012 18: 10
        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.
    30. red 015
      0
      27 August 2012 17: 51
      a good thing. push it into the army
    31. +1
      27 August 2012 17: 55
      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!
    32. bask
      -2
      27 August 2012 18: 23
      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
    33. 0
      27 August 2012 19: 05
      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.
    34. 0
      27 August 2012 20: 00
      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?
    35. Sober
      0
      27 August 2012 20: 30
      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
        +1
        27 August 2012 20: 34
        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.
    36. His
      0
      27 August 2012 20: 36
      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. 0
        27 August 2012 21: 44
        sorry, did not notice your link and duplicated feel
    37. 0
      27 August 2012 20: 47
      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!
    38. +1
      27 August 2012 21: 43
      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
    39. Phase
      +2
      27 August 2012 21: 52
      Quote: Ataturk
      Crammed by the most can not. There will be a good tank!

      Ataturk, I have a question for you. The time of publication of the article is 9.38, the time of the appearance of your comment is 9.40. Did you really read the article in 2 minutes? I envy that this time would not have been enough for me. Although in order to find a video with "Terminator" by a search engine, two minutes is probably enough. laughing

      Quote: bye
      I am always confused by "lobbying" in the military-industrial complex, especially, but here it is almost turned into "heroism" ... With all due respect to Rogozin, as an official, I very much doubt his knowledge of armored vehicles and knowledge of modern tactics of database management.

      This is what I wanted to write. +1. Rogozin is still more involved in promoting himself. And it was also alarming that his desire to promote this car is based, it turns out, "on love." And not on the real requirements of the current tactics and principles of recruiting units.

      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.
    40. 0
      27 August 2012 23: 21
      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.
    41. +2
      27 August 2012 23: 25
      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.
    42. badervlad
      0
      27 August 2012 23: 25
      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.
    43. Nechai
      0
      27 August 2012 23: 46
      Quote: suharev-52
      But seriously - the vesh in the troops is necessary. But only in combination with other equipment.

      Right! In addition to the foreign policy ban on equipping our Armed Forces with SUCH a complex of armored weapons, there is also an internal factor in the Defense Ministry - not knowledge, not desire, fear of conducting experiments - after all, not everything will work out from the first call. Indeed, in fact, it is necessary to create a previously non-existent system of COMPREHENSIVE TRAINING in essence of a GENERAL armored unit, preserving and organically matching with the existing training methods for tankers, artillerymen, anti-aircraft gunners. To "give birth" a methodology for training BMPT crews, to develop and perfect algorithms for interaction, retargeting, concentration and dispersal of firepower. That is, to bring the work of the battalion headquarters, brigade to another higher and very dynamic level. And no matter how the need arose to create a kind of "company headquarters". In general, we need officers on this topic who WISH TO SEARCH and ABLE TO FIND new solutions. Striving to create a system of training a well-coordinated armored ORCHESTRA.
      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.
      In the comments flashed a proposal to increase the caliber of the main armament of the BMPT. Sudari, the main used caliber of the crew of this chariot is from 120mm and above. Including multiple launch rocket systems, tactical missiles, etc. As well as the guidance of army aviation. And what is already on it provides its own protection and the safety of escorted tanks, etc. at an average and short distance from what may remain after passing the artillery-aviation steel "skating rink".
      1. DIMS
        0
        28 August 2012 00: 18
        I don’t know how for rocket launchers or air corrector, but as a machine for advanced artillery observers BMPT is a complete ZERO
    44. Mr. Truth
      0
      28 August 2012 00: 47
      the strike link for heavy connections should be part of the MBT-BMP (with 45 or 57 mm AP) for all the others (for normal infantry, light infantry on trucks, "airmobile fast and lethal", this is for narcissists, and I think special forces or a helicopter regiment or an OTR strike will do better than these daffodils) you need a TRACKED APC of a middle class, floating, with a low specific pressure on the ground, simplicity and manufacturability in production and maintenance. Let the wheels and patrol cars remain.
    45. Evgen232
      0
      28 August 2012 01: 54
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jznxu8IIwII

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jznxu8IIwII
    46. Vanek
      +1
      28 August 2012 05: 55
      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.
    47. posad636
      0
      28 August 2012 07: 06
      The Terminator is needed. Rogozin is right that he does not listen to the brass-faced generals. As you know, they traditionally do not represent anything in our country. They receive ranks and positions by laying tables, bribes, and even putting wives under higher-ranking officials.
      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.
      It's the same with the Terminator. The vehicle is simply indispensable in battle to cover tanks. She can independently successfully resist the enemy, both in a regular and tank battle.
      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.
    48. 0
      28 August 2012 08: 44
      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
        0
        28 August 2012 09: 26
        And what can suffer from splinters and bullets? Grenade launcher? Automatic guns? Missiles - yes, but where to hide them? It's impossible.
        30 mm is what you need. I happened to be under the "friendly" fire of a 30 mm cannon. Very impressed.
        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
    49. 0
      28 August 2012 09: 19
      I disagree with many commentators. "Terminator" is quite suitable for solving police tasks. In a combat situation as part of the BTG, in the combat formations of motorized rifle and / or tank companies, a useless cart. The following reasons:
      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.
      In order of battle, you need to put "Armor", "Tunguska" and "Shilki". Moreover, all equipment should be provided with a target detection system with UAVs; there must be a unified system of coordination of forces and assets on the battlefield; worked out system of interaction. It should be understood that any technical means are not made as independent means of warfare, but to support the "Queen of the Fields" - the INFANTRY. And accordingly, tank, helicopter, art and anti-aircraft units serve the infantry. As practice shows. The infantry now needs a heavy infantry fighting vehicle with anti-tank armor to provide a breakthrough or stability in defense with modern means of remote reconnaissance from radars to UAVs. And for operations behind enemy lines, a light BMP of the BMD-4 type.
      1. posad636
        0
        28 August 2012 09: 28
        And who are you? An officer or just a computer drocher?
        1. 0
          28 August 2012 10: 17
          Generally speaking, among the commentators, the appeal to "you" is welcome. Secondly, I have already written partly about my biography. Thirdly, I can consider myself almost a tanker, since the company where I was subordinate directly to the command of the 1st GvTA (direct neighbors of the 11th GvTD). Also, due to the work in the future, I saw a lot of materials on the creation of BMPT and why they closed an interesting topic on the "Dragon".
          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
            0
            28 August 2012 10: 46
            I haven't laughed like that for a long time!))))))))))))))) "I can consider myself a tanker ...." (and an astronaut, as well as a gynecologist), "I saw a lot of materials" ..... NIGHTMARE!
            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?

    "Right Sector" (banned in Russia), "Ukrainian Insurgent Army" (UPA) (banned in Russia), ISIS (banned in Russia), "Jabhat Fatah al-Sham" formerly "Jabhat al-Nusra" (banned in Russia) , Taliban (banned in Russia), Al-Qaeda (banned in Russia), Anti-Corruption Foundation (banned in Russia), Navalny Headquarters (banned in Russia), Facebook (banned in Russia), Instagram (banned in Russia), Meta (banned in Russia), Misanthropic Division (banned in Russia), Azov (banned in Russia), Muslim Brotherhood (banned in Russia), Aum Shinrikyo (banned in Russia), AUE (banned in Russia), UNA-UNSO (banned in Russia), Mejlis of the Crimean Tatar People (banned in Russia), Legion “Freedom of Russia” (armed formation, recognized as terrorist in the Russian Federation and banned)

    “Non-profit organizations, unregistered public associations or individuals performing the functions of a foreign agent,” as well as media outlets performing the functions of a foreign agent: “Medusa”; "Voice of America"; "Realities"; "Present time"; "Radio Freedom"; Ponomarev; Savitskaya; Markelov; Kamalyagin; Apakhonchich; Makarevich; Dud; Gordon; Zhdanov; Medvedev; Fedorov; "Owl"; "Alliance of Doctors"; "RKK" "Levada Center"; "Memorial"; "Voice"; "Person and law"; "Rain"; "Mediazone"; "Deutsche Welle"; QMS "Caucasian Knot"; "Insider"; "New Newspaper"