Military Review

Lack of armor: the Pentagon runs the risk of being left without new infantry fighting vehicles

92

M2A4 Bradley. Source: invoen.ru


Old Lady M2 Bradley


Strictly speaking, the Bradley family cars cannot be called overly obsolete. The start of production of the American BMP dates back to 1980. For comparison: the Russian army still serves morally and technically obsolete BMP-1 and BMP-2 vehicles, developed back in the late 60s. The modernization potential of the vehicles has already been exhausted, and the installation of the next generations of remotely controlled combat modules will not solve the problem. Obviously, there is an understanding of a similar problem in the United States. Only now, nothing sensible has come of it yet. Unlike Russia, where the state tests of the T-15 heavy infantry fighting vehicle on the Armata platform are underway, the United States does not even have a workable prototype. At the same time, an experimental batch of T-15 should appear in the Russian army already in 2022. Do not forget about the Kurganets-25 floating BMP, which should replace the BMP-3.


M2 Bradley. Source: wikimedia.org

Changing generations of armored vehicles is always very painful and expensive for the state budget. In the United States, the introduction of new infantry fighting vehicles can take 5-6 years, or even more. Now in the units of the ground forces and the National Guard there are at least 2,5 thousand M2A2 / A3 Bradley vehicles. And more than 2 thousand are in storage. Modern modifications for scouts and artillerymen M7A3 BFIST serve in the army in the amount of 334 copies. Wheeled infantry fighting vehicles М1296 Stryker Dragoon are still very few in the troops (up to 100 vehicles) and they are intended for other purposes. These are rather light, highly mobile infantry fighting vehicles and even armored personnel carriers with cannon armament. The Marine Corps is armed with the LAV-25 amphibious infantry fighting vehicle, which is an upgrade of the Swiss MOWAG Piranha I. Now the Marines have more than 300 vehicles, but they also cannot replace the heavy M2 Bradley.


M2 Bradley. Source: vpk.name

Like any other Cold War machine, the M2 Bradley is a mediocre fit to the realities of modern conflict. In particular, in Iraq, BMP demonstrated insufficient survivability, especially against mines and improvised explosive devices. Despite the relatively heavy armor, the M2 Bradley remains vulnerable to light anti-tank weapons. Placing effective reactive armor on light armor is understandably very difficult, so the main focus is on active defense such as the Israeli Iron Fist. But the idea of ​​enhancing the armor of the DZ did not completely go away either. Only, according to engineering calculations, this will add another 1,5 tons of mass to the already not the lightest Bradley. It will also require the use of new materials. Coupled with the integration of the remote control system, modernization of electrical equipment, motor and transmission, it is much more logical not to disturb the well-deserved M2, but to develop a new generation BMP. But everything turns out to be not so simple.

The second youth


The modernization of a combat vehicle with several decades of experience will keep it in good shape for another 10-15 years. But not more. The Pentagon understands this very well, and until recently they were conducting two projects at once related to tracked infantry fighting vehicles. First of all, a transitional modernization of Bradley was required, with which you can buy time before the appearance of a new generation of machines. In the "road map" of the Pentagon, two upgrades at once acted in this role - up to the M2A4 and M2A5 levels. Among other things, the A4 machine was supposed to receive a 30-mm M813 cannon, new guided missiles, a combat control system mentioned by KAZ Iron Fist Light Decoupled and BRAT II DZ units (Bradley Reactive Armor Tiles). The new things are also a diesel 8-cylinder Cummins VTA903E-T675 with a capacity of 675 horsepower and a transmission HMPT-800-3ECB. Work started in 2015, and in accordance with plans in 2021, the first M2A4s were supposed to enter the ground forces. The Pentagon immediately reserved money for 473 armored vehicles. But in reality, BMPs will go to the military at best in the fall of next year. Of course, such a shift to the right can be explained by coronavirus reasons, but in this case there is an engineering miscalculation. Having loaded the BMP with new electrical equipment, the developers did not think about upgrading the batteries. As a result, during operational tests in Fort Hood, Texas, toxic gas was poured into the cockpit and fighting compartment from batteries. The developers expect to receive new, more capacious batteries only by January 2022, and then the test cycle will be repeated again. And only if everything is within the bounds of what is permitted, the A2A4 will appear in the army by September next year. Together with the next modification of the A5, these infantry fighting vehicles should serve in the ground forces until 2050! That is, a real second youth is planned for Bradley.


M2A3 Bradley at the Mackenzie Operations Base in Iraq, 2004. Source: gazeta.ru

The model of a deeper modernization of the BMP under the M2A5 index already implies a radical restructuring. The first cars should appear in the National Guard as early as 2023, but, obviously, the dates will shift to the right. History with A4 is an example. It is possible that the creation of a new "fifth" modernization will be canceled altogether in favor of the development of a new generation of infantry fighting vehicles. With the A5 model, the imagination of customers and developers was played out in earnest. The package included a laser cannon, surface-to-air missiles for countering drones and new DZ and KAZ systems. The car will be thoroughly blocked from the inside. They will strengthen the mine protection of the bottom, as well as transfer the ammunition stowage to a less vulnerable place. 3rd generation thermal imagers, automatic target tracking and friend or foe detection are also included in the Bradley M2A5 configuration list. Paradoxically, the Americans are counting on reducing the weight of the BMP.

Projects that failed


The first attempts to replace Bradley with a fundamentally new machine took place back in 2003 as part of the large-scale Future Combat Systems (FCS) program. The Pentagon planned to completely change the BMP, self-propelled guns and main combat forces in 20-25 years. Tanks on new manned and unmanned armored vehicles. For the American military-industrial complex FCS is still a painful topic. In fact, they wasted, according to various sources, from 18 to 32 billion dollars. The total cost of rearmament of the US ground forces was estimated at an exorbitant 340 billion. The expert of the American Center for Strategic and International Studies Todd Harrison regretfully comments on the results of the failed rearmament:

"The FCS program was a massive failure and a missed opportunity to modernize the army."

According to the official version, funding was stopped in 2009 due to the concentration of efforts on the fight against terrorism. In addition, Pentagon experts twelve years ago did not really believe in the possibility of a direct clash with Russia and China, so they decided to forget about the generational change of armored vehicles for a while.

Lack of armor: the Pentagon runs the risk of being left without new infantry fighting vehicles
The plans to replace Bradley were only part of the massive FCS program. Source: globalsecurity.org

In 2010, for the second time, the Americans decided to replace the well-deserved Bradley with a new BMP in the Ground Combat Vehicle (GCV) project. According to calculations, it was supposed to be a 60-ton highly protected vehicle, which the troops were counting on in 2020. As you know, nothing sensible came of this. Largely due to excessive demands on the machine. The military wanted to see not just a new BMP, but an armored vehicle with a complex of revolutionary solutions. The BMP was supposed to be guaranteed to protect the crew and nine paratroopers from all angles from 30-mm shells, ATGMs, mines and RPGs. High mobility was provided by a hybrid power plant, and a promising 40-50-mm gun was responsible for the increased firepower. On paper, the BMP came out very well, but in reality it turned out to be overweight (more than 63 tons) and expensive (up to $ 20 million per unit). The Pentagon was not ready to purchase the planned 2000 infantry fighting vehicles at more than doubled the price. By comparison, the M1 Abrams costs taxpayers between $ 4,8 million and $ 6 million. The developers tried to reduce costs by offering an additional 155-mm self-propelled gun and an engineering armored vehicle based on the GCV. The problem of excessive weight was partly solved by excluding five paratroopers at once from the nine planned. The result was a 45-ton armored vehicle, which the BMP could hardly be called. Rather, it was a lightly armed tank with a miniature troop compartment. GCV in this configuration was hard to find a place on the battlefield. The army understood this and in 2014 the project was closed.


Infantry fighting vehicle project offered by BAE Systems for the US Army GCV (c) BAE Systems tender. Source: bmpd.livejournal.com

Remembered the concept of "two crew members + four / five paratroopers" in 2016 as part of the NGCV (Next-Generation Combat Vehicle) project. The military realized the impossibility of replacing the Bradley with a heavily armored infantry fighting vehicle with similar mass-dimensional characteristics, so they transplanted an infantry squad of 9 people into two vehicles at once. And later, in general, the very possibility of piloting was declared an option. So in 2018, the most modern project OMFV (Optionally Manned Fighting Vehicle) appeared. Now it is planned to have only two crew members, six paratroopers, elements of artificial intelligence in management and combat, as well as light weight. Once again, the Pentagon asks developers to reduce the weight of the combat vehicle, while providing a significant increase in security. The C-17 Globemaster transport aircraft should take on board two OMFVs at once. This means that the maximum weight of the BMP should not exceed 37-38 tons.


The BMP based on the Lynx KF41 may well become the new American Bradley. Source: armytimes.com

At the moment, all work on OMFV has been restarted - in January 2020, the Pentagon re-announced a competition for developers. If earlier the first prototypes to replace Bradley were expected by 2026, now everything is postponed indefinitely. In 2022, contractors will only decide on the concept of an armored vehicle, and by 2023 they will start designing the first technology demonstrator. Let us clarify once again that this is the most optimistic scenario for the Americans. One of the most likely contenders for the role of a promising American BMP may be the deeply modernized Lynx KF41 from Rheinmetall. The American company Allison Transmission has already announced that it is ready to cooperate with the Germans on the development of an electric transmission for the OMFV project.

For decades, the United States Army has been content with the role of poor cousins ​​versus the “wealthy” of the Navy, Air Force, and Marine Corps. The aggravation of relations with Russia and China makes the Pentagon think about the outcome of large-scale multi-domain battles. The lack of modern infantry fighting vehicles in service is a certain vulnerability of the American ground forces. It seems that for the foreseeable future, the infantry will fight in the good old M2 Bradley.
Author:
92 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. andrewkor
    andrewkor 11 May 2021 05: 35
    +1
    "There is no story sadder in the world ..."! Let them continue in the same spirit. I can recommend reviving the Mouse project - the troop platoon will also fit!
    1. Alex777
      Alex777 11 May 2021 16: 37
      +1
      American troops are impressively equipped with technology.
      But when it is necessary to replace it all, problems begin.
      And they are reluctant to reduce the maintenance of bases around the world.
  2. Ravik
    Ravik 11 May 2021 05: 42
    0
    What is the problem? Inflatable armored personnel carriers, tanks, planes !!!
  3. Revolver
    Revolver 11 May 2021 05: 46
    +3
    OMFV (Optionally Manned Fighting Vehicle)
    OMG !!! Such a politically incorrect, sexist name! It does not take into account females at all, as well as any different and other genders that may possibly serve on this technique. Or will serving on it be an exclusively male privilege, with which, as such, the entire progressive society must fight? It will be necessary to inform Biden, or not, Kamala is better, because Biden himself does not decide anything. wassat
    1. The comment was deleted.
      1. Revolver
        Revolver 11 May 2021 06: 08
        0
        Quote: Artemion3
        Yeah, then Optionally Femaled Vehicle

        And what do you want to do with Trans, Gender queer, Non-conforming gender, and others, I'm already confused, how are they officially recognized there, by genders and sexual orientations?
        1. dzvero
          dzvero 11 May 2021 15: 57
          +1
          The most neutral is the optionally populated / habitated fighting vehicle. It can be more capacious and shorter, taking into account the nuances and diversity, but the moderator does not sleep smile
        2. volodimer
          volodimer 11 May 2021 17: 11
          0
          Just let them paint in rainbow camouflage, everything will be tolerant at once.
          And it will be easier for our gunners too. lol
  4. Artemion3
    Artemion3 11 May 2021 06: 05
    +1
    The Amers have priority for the Air Force, then the Navy, then St. It amazes me how they sent Hummers to Iraq, where they were blown up after one
    1. Sergey Aleksandrovich
      Sergey Aleksandrovich 11 May 2021 17: 05
      +5
      And whatever you send there, you will still blow up laughing
      1. Artemion3
        Artemion3 11 May 2021 17: 37
        0
        Don't tell me, strikers are doing well
        1. Sergey Aleksandrovich
          Sergey Aleksandrovich 11 May 2021 21: 01
          0
          But they were also blown up! laughing
          1. Artemion3
            Artemion3 11 May 2021 21: 21
            0
            They were blown up, but all remained intact, tk. they are not armored personnel carriers, namely wheeled infantry fighting vehicles both in weight and in armor, but they cannot swim.
            1. Sergey Aleksandrovich
              Sergey Aleksandrovich 11 May 2021 21: 46
              0
              Well, this is what kind of mine to step on, that is, to run over. Armored personnel carriers, they say, are better than BMPs sometimes held explosions, but, as they say, a large ship has a large torpedo.
              There is nothing strange in the fact that heavier equipment holds blasts better, not surprising.
              1. Artemion3
                Artemion3 11 May 2021 21: 58
                0
                Well, there are much less heavy land mines than light ones
  5. Professor
    Professor 11 May 2021 06: 09
    +5
    Despite the relatively heavy armor, the M2 Bradley remains vulnerable to light anti-tank weapons. Placing effective reactive armor on light armor is understandably very difficult, so the main focus is on active defense such as the Israeli Iron Fist. But the idea of ​​enhancing the armor of the DZ did not completely go away either. Only, according to engineering calculations, this will add another 1,5 tons of mass to the already not the lightest Bradley.

    DZ has long been successfully placed on Bradley. This can be seen even from the photo of the author himself.
    1. Bradley
      Bradley 11 May 2021 06: 45
      0
      These are boxes for brewing and storing Doshirak. It's a shame not to know.
    2. yehat2
      yehat2 11 May 2021 09: 37
      +1
      Quote: Professor
      DZ has been successfully placed on Bradl for a long time

      in what sense is it successful?
      even a quick glance reveals that about half of the silhouette remains unprotected
      Of course, the presence of remote sensing is better than its absence, but this is where all the success ends.
      In addition, the big question is how effective these elements of the remote sensing are and how the infantry outside will rejoice when they are triggered.
      1. Professor
        Professor 11 May 2021 10: 19
        +5
        Quote: yehat2
        even a quick glance reveals that about half of the silhouette remains unprotected

        Where did you get this information from?
        The anterior to the lateral projection is covered by more than 80%.


        "successful" in terms of combat experience.

        Quote: yehat2
        In addition, the big question is how effective these elements of the remote sensing are and how the infantry outside will rejoice when they are triggered.

        How effective are they written by both the manufacturer and the American army. Regarding infantry, dynamic armor is not useful for infantry. Some have more, some have less.
        1. yehat2
          yehat2 11 May 2021 10: 41
          -2
          Quote: Professor
          Where did you get this information from?
          The anterior to the lateral projection is covered by more than 80%.

          see photos of real cars.
          on 99% of the vehicles there are no DZ on the tower at all, there are 2 rows on the forehead, not 3, and the side line of DZ is somewhere, but somewhere it is not at all or is partially there.
          In addition, you probably guess that ATGMs arrive not only in the forehead.
          Finally, there is a photo of Bradley shot up in Iraq.
          for example, here
          https://i.mycdn.me/i?r=AzEPZsRbOZEKgBhR0XGMT1Rk22bTtmR7ri9UIJYpep7XnKaKTM5SRkZCeTgDn6uOyic
          just hit by an RPG-7. And DZ, as you can see, is in place, but it did not help.
          1. Professor
            Professor 11 May 2021 11: 12
            +1
            Quote: yehat2
            see photos of real cars.
            on 99% of the vehicles there are no DZ on the tower at all, there are 2 rows on the forehead, not 3, and the side line of DZ is somewhere, but somewhere it is not at all or is partially there.

            I look at the photos of real cars. The protection corresponds to the presented model. There are samples on which the remote sensing is not installed.

            Quote: yehat2
            In addition, you probably guess that ATGMs arrive not only in the forehead.

            This is true for all armored vehicles including tanks. How is the T-72 with the remote control at the stern?

            Quote: yehat2
            Finally, there is a photo of Bradley shot up in Iraq.
            for example, here
            https://i.mycdn.me/i?r=AzEPZsRbOZEKgBhR0XGMT1Rk22bTtmR7ri9UIJYpep7XnKaKTM5SRkZCeTgDn6uOyic
            just hit by an RPG-7. And DZ, as you can see, is in place, but it did not help.

            Non-penetrable armored vehicles do not exist. This time.
            The cause of this car's fire is not clear. These are two.
            1. yehat2
              yehat2 11 May 2021 11: 17
              -3
              Quote: Professor
              The cause of the fire of this car is not clear

              it is not clear to you. The car has characteristic signs of defeat from an RPG.
              besides, I just reminded you that forehead protection is not everything.
              The problem is that the Americans, despite the enormous weight of Bradley, could not really protect her, and in Israel the intend has relatively reliable protection, having a close weight.
              Those. there are examples.
              There are also flamethrower infantry fighting vehicles based on the T-72 in the Russian Federation, which are very reliably protected. and which weigh 15 tons less.
              1. Professor
                Professor 11 May 2021 11: 33
                +1
                Quote: yehat2
                it is not clear to you. The car has characteristic signs of defeat from the RPG.

                Where and what?

                Quote: yehat2
                The problem is that the Americans, despite the enormous weight of Bradley, could not really protect her, and in Israel the intend has relatively reliable protection, having a close weight.

                Yes? Namer weighs more than double that of Bradley. Why write nonsense? Compare the better protection of the one-pupils Bradley and the BMP-3.

                Quote: yehat2
                There are also flamethrower infantry fighting vehicles based on the T-72 in the Russian Federation, which are very reliably protected. and which weigh 15 tons less.

                Less than whom? Let's get the numbers into the studio.
                1. yehat2
                  yehat2 11 May 2021 11: 35
                  -1
                  Quote: Professor
                  Yes? Namer weighs more than double that of Bradley. Why write nonsense? Compare the better protection of the one-pupils Bradley and the BMP-3.

                  Bradley Zero weighed 28 tons
                  with new equipment, body kits and armor on the bottom, its weight is already
                  45-47 tons
                  Are you saying Namer weighs 90+ ???
                  and the BMP-3 with the Bradley is not entirely correct to compare.
                  it is rather a light amphibious tank with a landing force than an infantry fighting vehicle.
                  and the weight ... 18-19 tons, i.e. 2.5 bradley.
                  comparing their bookings is at least strange.
                  1. Professor
                    Professor 11 May 2021 13: 08
                    -1
                    Quote: yehat2
                    Bradley Zero weighed 28 tons
                    with new equipment, body kits and armor on the bottom, its weight is already
                    45-47 tons

                    Without DZ, Bradley weighed 22.5 tons. With all canopies it does not exceed 30 tons.
                    https://fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/land/m2.htm
                    Weighs from 60 tons and more.

                    Quote: yehat2
                    and the BMP-3 with the Bradley is not entirely correct to compare.
                    it is rather a light amphibious tank with a landing force than an infantry fighting vehicle.
                    and the weight ... 18-19 tons, i.e. 2.5 bradley.
                    comparing their bookings is at least strange.

                    Weight 19 and 22 tons are comparable.
                    Compare Bradley to the BMP-2. How is the latter's protection?
                    How many percent of the projection is covered by remote sensing? wink
                    1. The comment was deleted.
                      1. Professor
                        Professor 11 May 2021 13: 31
                        -2
                        You are not studying Wiki, but specialized resources
                        https://fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/land/m2.htm
                        Weight 50,000 lbs 22679.6 kg

                        There is no need to argue with me about performance characteristics. Just learn the materiel. Here is the link for the third time:
                        https://fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/land/m2.htm

                        Do you have any questions about Namer?

                        PS
                        https://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/ground/m2-specs.htm
                        http://www.military-today.com/apc/m3_bradley.htm
                        https://www.militaryfactory.com/armor/detail.php?armor_id=125
                      2. yehat2
                        yehat2 11 May 2021 13: 32
                        0
                        it is you who teach materiel. Why are you bringing in a 2 year old m15 modification?
                        Has nothing changed since then?
                      3. Professor
                        Professor 11 May 2021 13: 43
                        -3
                        Quote: yehat2
                        it is you who teach materiel. Why are you bringing in a 2 year old m15 modification?
                        Has nothing changed since then?

                        What changed? Let's be more specific in terms of materiel.
                        Tell us how M3A1 differs from M3A2 and from M3A3 and from M3A4. Or should I tell you again?

                        PS
                        Quote: Professor
                        Quote: yehat2
                        it is not clear to you. The car has characteristic signs of defeat from an RPG.

                        Where and what?
  • Kot_Kuzya
    Kot_Kuzya 11 May 2021 07: 37
    +5
    Modern generals are again trying to combine two in one: a tank and an infantry fighting vehicle. They completely do not take into account the experiments of 90 years ago, when they tried to sculpt two, or even three in one: wheeled-tracked tanks, multi-turret tanks, tanks with two guns. You can't make a racing car out of a tank, but you don't need it. In the same way, it is impossible from a tank or an infantry fighting vehicle to make a car with protection like a tank, and carrying an infantry squad, and at the same time having a weight and cost within reasonable limits. I do not see any reason at all to make an infantry fighting vehicle with protection like a tank, because the infantry will still fight on dismounted, in which case there is no point in such heavy protection of the BMP. And if it is assumed that the infantry will fight from inside the BMP, then there is no point in carrying the infantry with you inside for the combat vehicle. I believe that for an infantry fighting vehicle with 9 airborne soldiers, 25 mm armor will be enough to protect against large fragments and bullets with a caliber of 12,7 mm, and an armament complex as on the BMP-3 from a 100-mm gun-launcher, a 30-mm automatic cannon and machine gun 7,62. Then, when creating such an infantry fighting vehicle, it is possible to fit into a weight of up to 25 tons and at an affordable price.
    1. Konnick
      Konnick 11 May 2021 08: 24
      -1
      I don't see any reason at all to make an infantry fighting vehicle with protection like a tank


      Our army is well saturated with infantry fighting vehicles and armored personnel carriers, just the factories are trying to load themselves as in the period of the arms race with the release of thousands of tanks. And these thousands of tanks undermined the Soviet economy. Attempts to launch Armata and combat vehicles based on it are also an attempt to load production. And the huge variety of explosion-resistant mines for transport exceeds a reasonable amount, but this is a technique for the police, not for the army. The army moves in columns, not single patrol cars. Really, the war in Karabakh has not yet restructured the minds of the generals about changing the format of hostilities, do they really want to have stupid tank armada of super-expensive armored vehicles?
      1. Sergey Aleksandrovich
        Sergey Aleksandrovich 11 May 2021 12: 26
        -1
        As the experience of the last conflict on the territory of Ukraine shows, the encirclement in the style of Guderian has not lost its relevance, like the tank armadas themselves.
        1. Konnick
          Konnick 11 May 2021 13: 46
          +2
          environments in the style of Guderian have not lost their relevance, as have the tank armadas themselves.


          Guderian-style environments were only possible under the dominance of aviation. There were no such wedges in Donbass, tanks were quickly burned.
          1. Sergey Aleksandrovich
            Sergey Aleksandrovich 11 May 2021 14: 10
            0
            And with the help of what then the boilers were arranged and strong points were seized? Is it really only on foot?
      2. yehat2
        yehat2 11 May 2021 13: 25
        -2
        Quote: Konnick
        factories are trying to load themselves as in the period of the arms race with the release of thousands of tanks. And these thousands of tanks undermined the Soviet economy.

        the military did not strain the Soviet economy much. Now the Russian Federation is spending twice as much of its GDP on the army.
        And the reforms of Khrushchev and the scum that he brought to power and to the service to them undermined the economy of the USSR. This is what the economy could not stand.
        As an illustrative example, I will cite only 1 fact that almost all investments of the USSR over the last 7 years before perestroika were deliberately destroyed by the top - mainly on strange projects that could not end in anything but failure. With this money, it was possible to supply 4 more groups of troops in Germany. By the way, remembering Khrushchev. The USSR wasted the entire resources of the five-year plan for the development of virgin lands. This is who ruined the economy. I'm not even mentioning what a nightmare was planned for the environment.
        1. Sergey Aleksandrovich
          Sergey Aleksandrovich 11 May 2021 13: 51
          0
          How deep you were! To be precise, Ukrainian nationalism and dizziness from successes at the top ruined the Union, not difficulties with the economy. The dizziness of success was expressed in the slogans about socialism that defeated us, without exaggeration, "finally and irrevocably" and the 7 rubles for the conscripts, that is, they decided that they had won so much that we had enough 7 rudders for our eyes.
          And the tanks will certainly not be superfluous, as now the T-80 is being dashingly modernized.
          And about the ecology should be clarified. The struggle for the environment then came down to a total ban for us, not for them, on the drug against lice under the epic name DDT. As a result of this ecological struggle, a limited contingent in Afghanistan was seized by lice.
          1. yehat2
            yehat2 11 May 2021 14: 12
            +4
            Quote: Sergey Alexandrovich
            about socialism that defeated us, without exaggeration, "finally and irrevocably"

            this is only a small part of what Khrushchev did. The so-called idea of ​​communism sausages in a separate taken capitalist apartment. And the deterioration of relations with China occurred when Mao saw what and how this corn-maker was doing.
            1. Sergey Aleksandrovich
              Sergey Aleksandrovich 11 May 2021 14: 42
              +1
              Khrushchev was in charge for only 10 years, and 7 rubles of monetary allowance in the 80s was established without his participation. If he made mistakes, then there was enough time to fix it. It would be reasonable to lag behind him, especially since he did not differ too much from the next series of leaders.
    2. Sergey Aleksandrovich
      Sergey Aleksandrovich 11 May 2021 12: 15
      0
      It makes sense to make a heavy infantry fighting vehicle, for combat in urban conditions, against a saturated defense and heavy enemy infantry fighting vehicles, just like Bradley. Another thing is the question of their number, the ratio with the number of floating ones.
      1. Kot_Kuzya
        Kot_Kuzya 11 May 2021 12: 31
        0
        What's the point in heavy infantry fighting vehicles? Is it not simpler and more efficient to have a normal tank without a troop compartment, which will therefore have smaller dimensions and less weight, and as a result, better maneuverability and a smaller projection and, in addition to it, a normal BMP weighing 20-25 tons? Such a bundle of a tank and an infantry fighting vehicle will have greater efficiency and practicality than a heavy infantry fighting vehicle, which will either be weaker armed and protected than a tank, having a comparable weight with a modern main tank, or will be a huge monster weighing under 80-90 tons if it has protection and weapons at the level of a modern main tank.
        1. Sergey Aleksandrovich
          Sergey Aleksandrovich 11 May 2021 12: 40
          +4
          The point is to transport motorized riflemen under conditions of strong fire resistance. Light BMP-2,3 cannot withstand the small-caliber automatic cannons of the BMPs of NATO countries. And in the conditions of urban combat, it is desirable to deliver the troops under the maximum possible protection. The advantage of the heavy platform is the possibility of installing a powerful 57 mm automatic weapon of high ballistics. And tanks will not be able to act effectively enough without infantry, because of its lagging behind on light infantry fighting vehicles, stopped by massive fire resistance.
          The question of the ratio of the number of light and heavy infantry fighting vehicles.
          1. Kot_Kuzya
            Kot_Kuzya 11 May 2021 13: 15
            +1
            Are you seriously considering the possibility of a war between Russia and NATO? I rule out such a possibility, especially since if there really is a war, then there will be no tank wedges a la Guderian, but there will be just an exchange of nuclear loaves. Russia is a nuclear power, and none of the strong countries will fight with it. And the BMP-3 will be enough to force all sorts of stupid jackals like rodents and non-brothers into peace.
            1. Sergey Aleksandrovich
              Sergey Aleksandrovich 11 May 2021 13: 32
              +1
              How to consider the conflict in Donbass? He is still far from quiet. And NATO equipment may well be on the opposite side. And tank wedges were observed exactly there. When a no-fly zone is created, for various reasons, these dinosaurs will just climb under the accompaniment of multiple launch rocket systems.
              1. Kot_Kuzya
                Kot_Kuzya 11 May 2021 14: 26
                +2
                I beg of you! In 2014, in battles against miners and militias, the Sumerians showed themselves to be the true heirs of the UPA and OUN - that is, they were able to "fight" only with unarmed old people, children and women, as their ancestors did in Volyn, when they fearlessly massacred 100 thousand Polish women and children , and several hundred thousand more Jews were handed over to the Germans. If the Ukropov offensive in Donbass really begins now, it will either stall again in the same positions, or, much more likely, the dill will be thrown back to the borders of the Luhansk and Donetsk regions. The pans took Putin's thick hint, and did not begin the offensive for which their overseas masters had been preparing them all winter. It is not for nothing that Secretary of State Blinken recently flew to Kiev, most likely he flew in to find out why the dill did not launch an offensive in the Donbass. After all, there were no more objective reasons for Blinken's visit to Ukraine.
                1. Sergey Aleksandrovich
                  Sergey Aleksandrovich 11 May 2021 14: 39
                  +4
                  But shakozakidatelstva is not necessary, not a subject for discussion. The conflict just showed what kind of war one should prepare for, when planes do not fly, communication does not work.
                  1. Kot_Kuzya
                    Kot_Kuzya 11 May 2021 15: 31
                    0
                    The pans will run by putting tons of waste of their vital activity into their trousers up to Kiev faster than their screeching. It’s as if you don’t know their rotten mentality, according to which their hut is on the edge.
                    1. Sergey Aleksandrovich
                      Sergey Aleksandrovich 11 May 2021 15: 33
                      +1
                      So then it is so, so then it is of course, but how something happened, so on to you and please. The question is whether to consider the current territory of the LPNR a success, or it could have been wider, but could not?
                      1. Kot_Kuzya
                        Kot_Kuzya 11 May 2021 16: 15
                        +1
                        Of course they could not. Still, the population of Donbass in 2014 was less than the population of Ukraine by about 7 times: 5 and 35 million, respectively, and the Armed Forces of Ukraine, together with the Nazi volunteers, managed to shower the Donbass militia offensive with corpses and stabilize the front. Putin then did not dare to recognize the LPR and DPR, and openly help them with military force, as he did in August 2008 with South Ossetia and Abkhazia. Apparently, then Putin still had illusions about the possibility of a normal agreement with the "brotherly" people. Now Russia and Putin have nothing to lose, and so they imposed sanctions on everything that is possible, and if the Sumerians start an offensive again, then I believe that it will come to the recognition of the LPR and DPR, and open military assistance so that the armies of the people's republics could liberate their lands at least along the administrative boundaries of the former Luhansk and Donetsk regions. This is at least. Perhaps Putin will not stop there and may well create the Nikolaev, Kherson and Odessa people's republics, cutting off Ukraine from the sea. Without access to the sea, Ukraine will generally turn into Armenia or Moldova, which has no significance in world politics and future prospects.
                      2. Igor Ushakov
                        Igor Ushakov 11 May 2021 21: 14
                        -1
                        the armies of the people's republics would be able to liberate their lands at least along the administrative borders of the former Luhansk and Donetsk regions. This is at least. And perhaps Putin will not stop there and may well create the Nikolaev, Kherson and Odessa people's republics, cutting off Ukraine from the sea.
                        Hear how easily you decide our destiny. You are now talking about a territory with millions of people, among whom there are not so many who sincerely sypatize Russia.
                      3. Kot_Kuzya
                        Kot_Kuzya 11 May 2021 22: 47
                        -3
                        Quote: Igor Ushakov
                        Hear how easily you decide our destiny. You are now talking about a territory with millions of people, among whom there are not so many who sincerely sypatize Russia.

                        How old are you? Hopefully not 5 years old? Have you seen the movie "Braveheart"? There is a scene where GG, after the death of his father, came to pick up his uncle, and William, who was then very small, tells him that he does not want to leave his home. To which his uncle replies that "You, too, did not want your father to be killed?" Why do Ukrainians have such childish naivety and belief in some ideals invented by them in their mentality? Nobody will ask you, you are nobody at all and will call you in any way. You will greet the Russian troops with flowers the same way you greeted the Germans with flowers in 1941, you will ride in the same way for May 9, as you now ride for May 8, etc. etc. You are a nation of opportunists and khataskrains.
                      4. Igor Ushakov
                        Igor Ushakov 12 May 2021 21: 22
                        -1
                        Nobody will ask you

                        With losses, boilers and retreats, however, 70% of Donbass is part of Ukraine. How would you comment on this?
                        you are nobody at all, and there is no way to call you. You are a nation of opportunists and khataskrains.
                        It is precisely such a superficial and contradictory attitude on the part of the Russians that is one of the powerful factors hindering the union between our peoples.
                        You will greet the Russian troops with flowers just as you greeted the Germans with flowers in 1941
                        So you still decide what you want people's republics or general government under the leadership of the Russians? Contradict yourself. Yes, Germans were greeted with flowers only in Western Ukraine, and even then, not everywhere.
                        Why do Ukrainians have such childish naivety and belief in some ideals invented by them in their mentality? 
                        What ideals are we talking about? Again contradict yourself, what ideals can be
                        opportunists and khataskrains
                        , In your?
                        you will ride in the same way for May 9, as you will now ride for May 8
                        Dear, you are a victim of propaganda. The action with red poppies died so plainly, but the overwhelming majority of greeting cards in social networks with a St. George ribbon. Look how many people came on May 9 to the actions of the Immortal Regiment, how people with Soviet symbols were protected from the police. Mountains of flowers on monuments, rallies with flags - what's this?
                      5. Kot_Kuzya
                        Kot_Kuzya 12 May 2021 22: 53
                        0
                        Quote: Igor Ushakov
                        With losses, boilers and retreats, however, 70% of Donbass is part of Ukraine. How would you comment on this?

                        Putin is a Ukrainophile, he really believes that Ukrainians are a brotherly Russian people who need help. I hope that after Putin a person will come who will not suffer from the soviet remnant of "brotherhood" and will treat Ukraine and the Ukrainians as they deserve it: as with enemies who must be destroyed.

                        Quote: Igor Ushakov
                        It is precisely such a superficial and contradictory attitude on the part of the Russians that is one of the powerful factors hindering the union between our peoples.

                        Factors hindering the union: these are your rotten mentality, envy, laziness, attempts to sit on two chairs, trying to suck both from the West and from Russia, all your faith in Ukrainian exclusivity.
                        Quote: Igor Ushakov
                        So you still decide whether you want people's republics or a general-governorship under the leadership of the Russians? Contradict yourself. Yes, Germans were greeted with flowers only in Western Ukraine, and even then, not everywhere.

                        You read "Babi Yar" by Anatoly Kuznetsov, he perfectly describes how joyfully the people of Kiev greeted the Nazis in September 1941, how his grandfather hated the Russians, and waited for the arrival of the Germans as liberators from the Moscow yoke.
                        Quote: Igor Ushakov
                        What ideals are we talking about? Again contradict yourself, what ideals can be
                        opportunists and khataskrains
                        , In your?

                        You are blindly convinced that it is worth joining the EU and NATO, as salaries will be 10 thousand euros, and pensions will be 5 thousand euros, and that having entered the EU, you can do nothing at all and get paid for it. You are so accustomed to freebies, it is already written in your genes in your mentality. We got used to the fact that in the USSR you lived for 70 years on everything ready for free, and then Russia also feeds you for 30 years. I hope that after Putin a person will come who will stop feeding you.
                        Quote: Igor Ushakov
                        Dear, you are a victim of propaganda. The action with red poppies died so plainly, but the overwhelming majority of greeting cards in social networks with a St. George ribbon. Look how many people came on May 9 to the actions of the Immortal Regiment, how people with Soviet symbols were protected from the police. Mountains of flowers on monuments, rallies with flags - what's this?

                        Don't write nonsense. On May 9, there was a video of Sharia, where Ukronazis attacked old people and women, ripped off ribbons from them and beat them. And the police do not react to this in any way.
                      6. Igor Ushakov
                        Igor Ushakov 13 May 2021 19: 41
                        -1
                        treat Ukraine and Ukrainians as they deserve: as with enemies who must be destroyed.
                        It is clear that you do not like Ukrainians.
                        Then what do you dislike about
                        attempts to sit on two chairs, trying to suck both the West and Russia
                        Yes, we are lucky with the geographical position in relation to trade routes, it is a sin not to use this.
                        You read "Babi Yar" by Anatoly Kuznetsov,
                        Thanks for reading.
                        But, by the way, I did not receive an answer on the topic of "people's republics".
                        And I have matured another - and with whom are you going to populate these republics?
                        You are blindly convinced that it is worth joining the EU and NATO, as salaries will become 10 thousand euros, and pensions - 5 thousand euros, and that having entered the EU, you can do nothing at all and get paid for it. You are so accustomed to freebies, it is already written in your genes in your mentality
                        Now I understood Woland, to whom Berlioz was proving that he, Woland, did not exist. I’m even lazy to refute such a stream of consciousness.
                        Russia has been feeding you for 30 years too
                        Gas transit and trade? The first is our legal, natural right, the second is mutuallyprofitable.
                        Don't write nonsense. On May 9, there was a video of Sharia, where Ukronazis attacked old people and women, ripped off ribbons from them and beat them. And the police do not react to this in any way.

                        You are very unlucky, I haven't missed a single Shariy video for a long time. The Nazis rock the boat once, but shove it off. It was mainly the police who created problems, zealously fulfilling the moronic law, but even here those who were not indifferent stood up. And how curious you are, the Nazis, it turns out, the Ukrainians, but their opponents - it turns out not. And if you do not want to see what I have listed, then, as they say, "someone sees flowers and a fragrance, someone sees feces and garbage."
                      7. Kot_Kuzya
                        Kot_Kuzya 13 May 2021 22: 49
                        -1
                        Quote: Igor Ushakov
                        You read "Babi Yar" by Anatoly Kuznetsov,
                        Thanks for reading.
                        But, by the way, I did not receive an answer on the topic of "people's republics".

                        Read it. The author of Kiev and Ukrainian by nationality, fled to London in the 60s and published this book there, he himself is an anti-Soviet and Russophobe, the whole book whines about how Russians oppressed Ukrainians and Ukrainian culture, talks about the "horrors" of Stalin's repressions and the "Holodomor", then there is a book thoroughly anti-Soviet, and trust his description of how the people of Kiev happily greeted the Germans, and how his grandfather hated the Russians, is still worth it, the author had no sense in inventing such a thing. But he writes in an interesting and exciting way, I read it back in the 90s, as a kid, then in Russia they published a lot of all kinds of anti-Soviet literature.
                        .
                        ... And I have matured another - and with whom are you going to populate these republics?
                        They are already inhabited by Russians. As well as Crimea, where no one has deported anyone after 2014 and has not settled. It will be the same with the people's republics, where the population is 90% Russian. Crimea, Odessa, Nikolaev, Kherson, Lugansk and Donetsk regions are the former Novorossia, annexed to Russia in 1783 after the conquest of the Crimean Khanate. For your information, the territory of the Crimean Khanate included not only the Crimea itself, but also the northern Black Sea region, where the Krymchaks grazed their cattle. The Ukrainians never lived there, and if they did, it was only as slaves to the Crimeans. After the appropriation of Novorossiya to Russia, these Wild Lands began to be populated by Russians from the Black Earth Region. And the Ukrainians lived in their Little Russia.
                      8. Igor Ushakov
                        Igor Ushakov 15 May 2021 18: 39
                        0
                        It's nice to get a constructive response, especially with references to a story that I myself am interested in as a hobby.
                        The author is anti-Soviet and Russophobe
                        with such a resume, to perceive his book as a complete reflection of objective reality is tantamount to studying history from the "Penal Battalion" series, and not from serious sources, for example https://royallib.com/book/daynes_vladimir/shtrafbati_i_zagradotryadi_krasnoy_armii.html
                        After the appropriation of Novorossiya to Russia, these Wild Lands began to be populated by Russians from the Black Earth Region.
                        and Ukrainians, for new lands opened up new perspectives.
                        And the Ukrainians lived in their Little Russia.
                        Not only, for example, the formation of the Ukrainian diaspora in the Kuban, you, the Russians, are obliged to Prince Potemkin of Tauride. This great patron of the Cossacks, known among them under the nickname "Gritsko Nechesa", after the defeat of the Zaporozhye Sich, allowed those loyal to the Russian government to settle in the Kuban and throughout the Black Sea region, for which the Cossacks began to be called "Black Sea". The regiments of the Black Sea Cossacks covered themselves with immortal glory in the Patriotic War of 1812.
                        In Soviet times, thanks to large-scale construction projects, the development of infrastructure and the ideology of internationalism, peoples mixed even more actively.
                         It will be the same with the people's republics, where the population is 90% Russian. Crimea, Odessa, Nikolaev, Kherson, Lugansk and Donetsk regions are the former Novorossia

                        Let's go a little from afar, I'll tell you a little about myself. I am a citizen of Odessa, left-leaning (I was thinking in my youth to join the ranks of the Communist Party of Ukraine), a participant in the Anti-Maidan actions on the Kulikovo field. May 2, 2014, I was probably saved by the fact that I, as a diligent stay-at-home, worked in my garden plot.
                        Therefore, I immediately reacted to the mention of Novorosiya and the people's republics, the current Ukrainian government will never become my home.
                        It is not clear to me why you signed me up as Ukrainians, and nowhere on VO did you mention your nationality, and the surname ending in "-ov" suggests Russian roots, which corresponds to reality.
                        Now to the point.
                        1) The figure of 90% is clearly overstated, but it is impossible to estimate the real ethnic composition due to the absence of the "nationality" column in the passport, the erasure of cultural and linguistic differences, and a huge number of mixed marriages of various proportions. For example, I have both grandmothers - ukranki, both grandfathers - Russian.
                        2) Issues of nationality in the modern world fade into the background, much more important
                        a) the formation of a worldview and value system.
                        b) material component.
                        So, to be specific:
                        1. According to all polls and polls in the South-East, about 10-15% are "pro-European", the overwhelming majority of whom are Russophobes. Yes, propaganda works, although it is not nearly as effective as the bosses from Kiev would like. And even if of the irreconcilable radicals who take up arms, at most one in five, but with many millions of the population, this is essential.
                        Although, yes, there are noticeably more people loyal to Russia.
                        2. The change of statehood is in any case uncomfortable, the rupture of previous economic ties with uncertain prospects for new ones, the change of banks, currencies, etc. And sanctions and the status of an unrecognized republic ... for such a trading city as Odessa is a nightmare.
                        As a result, many entrepreneurs, for example the director of my plant, actively support, including financially, the Armed Forces of Ukraine, justifiably fearing ruin in the event of the fall of the Ukrainian government.
  • Konnick
    Konnick 11 May 2021 13: 52
    -1
    The point is to transport motorized riflemen under conditions of strong fire resistance. Light BMP-2,3 cannot withstand small-caliber automatic cannons of BMPs of NATO countries

    And what is the point of bringing motorized riflemen to the unsuppressed defense. In modern conditions, it is more important to search for enemy fire weapons and aim artillery and aviation at them, and to storm them head-on is simply to expose people to fire.
    1. Sergey Aleksandrovich
      Sergey Aleksandrovich 11 May 2021 13: 57
      +2
      It is certainly good to ride a victorious march over the remains of the enemy, but it does not always work out. So, extra protection sometimes does not hurt. And not everywhere "Grads" can be walked, common people will peck.
      1. Konnick
        Konnick 11 May 2021 14: 14
        -1
        It is certainly good to ride a victorious march over the remains of the enemy, but it does not always work out. So, extra protection sometimes does not hurt. And not everywhere "Grads" can be walked, common people will peck

        If we turn to the history of the Second World War, then in the 42nd the Germans used strongpoints in defense, but after overcoming the Red Army's shell hunger, the Wehrmacht left strongpoints for a continuous defense, and then for a mobile defense. With modern reconnaissance means, the location of a stationary defense in an open area has completely lost its meaning, Karabakh is an example for you.
        The 16-fold air superiority of our aviation in Operation Bagration left no chance for the Center group to resist the offensive.
        It's time to switch to the "long arm" tactics. There will be no oncoming tank battles, remember Iraq. The main thing is the search and destruction of command posts and blocking the enemy's logistics.
        1. Sergey Aleksandrovich
          Sergey Aleksandrovich 11 May 2021 14: 21
          +2
          But how this all contradicts a heavy infantry fighting vehicle is not clear. It is still impossible to escape from the battle in the conditions of development, as well as from the enemy's fire resistance.
          1. Konnick
            Konnick 11 May 2021 14: 38
            -1
            But how this all contradicts a heavy infantry fighting vehicle is not clear. It is still impossible to escape from the battle in the conditions of development, as well as from the enemy's fire resistance.

            Combat in urban conditions is very unpredictable. It may be better to completely blockade the settlement in order to deplete the enemy's reserves. Take, for example, the assault on Shushi, it was impossible to enter the city on armored vehicles, but the use of thermal imagers on the UAV made it possible to find out the location of the city's defense units. The special forces, using preliminary and current information, simply caught the Armenian defenders by surprise and shot them with pistols with silencers and cut them with knives. Information and information again.
            Heavy infantry fighting vehicles, after the first shot, become blind due to a cloud of dust. This is especially evident in the Syrian city battles. The Americans in Iraq and Afghanistan, being technically taller than the defenders, fought in the dark using night vision devices.
            1. Sergey Aleksandrovich
              Sergey Aleksandrovich 11 May 2021 14: 51
              0
              Allow me to answer in the same absurd way, in the style of an elder in the garden and guys in Kiev. To imperceptibly not approach, it is necessary to mine, and if you worry about the civilian population, then mainly with signal mines.
        2. voyaka uh
          voyaka uh 11 May 2021 21: 49
          +3
          "There will be no oncoming tank battles, let's remember Iraq" ///
          ----
          In both Iraqi wars, there were classic counter
          tank battles. In the First Iraqi there was a large night
          battle tanks-versus-tanks.
          In the Second Iraqi there was a counter battle of the Abrams against the disguised
          Iraqi T-72 National Guard. On the path of the Americans to Baghdad.
          The results of both battles were the same. sad
  • psiho117
    psiho117 11 May 2021 15: 39
    0
    Quote: Sergey Alexandrovich
    Light BMP-2,3 cannot withstand small-bore automatic cannons

    They don't even hold 12,7mm in the side, what kind of BMP autocannons are there.
    14,5mm KPV from the roof - sews them from 500+ meters ...
    1. Sergey Aleksandrovich
      Sergey Aleksandrovich 11 May 2021 15: 43
      0
      It is true of course, but the "Bradley" is supposed to be met head-on, and even here the BPM-3 does not really hold their modern sub-caliber projectiles.
  • yehat2
    yehat2 11 May 2021 13: 31
    +3
    Quote: Sergey Alexandrovich
    It makes sense to make a heavy BMP

    controversy over tactics is still raging.
    there is no consensus even about the necessary weapons.
    one likes a 40mm cannon, another 57, the third bangs 2 autocannons on the terminator, the fourth puts a mortar, the fifth - a howitzer, the sixth - a catapult for drones, the fifth puts an imitation of a tank cannon and a bunch of ATGMs, etc.
    So there is not even a clear answer, but is TBMP needed at all?
    One thing is clear - there is no point in planning a car without reference to a theater of operations.
    Here in Israel there is no water and floating machines did not give up to them.
    1. Sergey Aleksandrovich
      Sergey Aleksandrovich 11 May 2021 13: 39
      +5
      Yes, they already asked directly for urban battles in Syria, and it was a heavy infantry fighting vehicle with protection close to a tank one. Having a couple of motorized rifle divisions with heavy T-15s will not be superfluous.
      1. Konnick
        Konnick 11 May 2021 15: 11
        -1
        Yes, they already asked directly for urban battles in Syria, and it was a heavy infantry fighting vehicle with protection close to a tank one. Having a couple of motorized rifle divisions with heavy T-15s will not be superfluous

        The transportation of such T-15s is difficult, airmobility is zero. On an area with natural obstacles in the form of rivers and swamps, and there are very few bridges capable of withstanding 50-60 tons, but in the mountains it is better to have the appropriate equipment. The experience of Chechnya has shown that the most reliable are MTLB and BMD. Already passed ... the heavy royal tigers had no effect on the course of hostilities.
        1. Sergey Aleksandrovich
          Sergey Aleksandrovich 11 May 2021 15: 28
          -2
          About "Tigers" somehow unconvincing, only with their help the Germans and stopped our tank breakthroughs. You, of course, applied a demagogic twist, mentioning exactly "Royal", well, nothing, and we will cope with it.
          And your experience in Chechnya is very bad, well, very bad. In Afghanistan, they very quickly became convinced that lightweight BMDs poorly resist explosions and fire effects, because of their light hull, and the paratroopers were gradually transferred to BMPs. But how do you know about this, it is important to use the experience of Chechnya as a trump card.
          And it was in the mountains, in Afghanistan, that tanks were brought out for direct fire, where BMPs could not withstand the fire of large-caliber DShKs during the assault on fortified areas. And it is in the mountains, under massive enemy fire, that it is important to have time to issue a burst, and not one, from an automatic cannon, until the sights and observation devices are beaten. But how do you know about this, it is important to trump the experience of Chechnya.
          After all, no one denies the advantages of floating technology, but why you forbid to have a heavy one, I will not understand in any way.
    2. 3danimal
      3danimal 12 May 2021 05: 24
      0
      2 guns - dead end.
      On tanks before / during WW2 this was done.
      Better to put 1 more powerful, but not forgetting that the BMP is not a tank.
      Now another trend is shells with remote detonation. 30-40 (50mm) mm is enough.
  • yehat2
    yehat2 11 May 2021 13: 19
    0
    Quote: Kot_Kuzya
    Can't be made of a tank

    but how to find out where this line is "not allowed"?
    so they are experimenting
  • Snail N9
    Snail N9 11 May 2021 18: 40
    0
    In fact, BMP drags soldiers not for any reason, but in order to deliver them to a certain place on the battlefield. And the closer she gets them, the faster these soldiers will complete their task. Given the saturation of the modern battlefield with automatic weapons of various calibers and anti-tank weapons such as ATGMs, ATGMs, RPGs, mines and drones, an infantry fighting vehicle is needed as protected as possible in order to save the landing force before it is delivered to its destination, or if it has already received a hit, then withstand it without serious consequences for the landing. The Jews were the first to understand this, having created their own tanks with space for the transport of troops and heavy infantry fighting vehicles of the Azarchit type. Now the saturation of the battlefield with patrolling ammunition and drones sets the task of a radical revision of the role of classic armored vehicles and the creation of completely new vehicles that are highly protected from attacks from above and capable of fighting both an air enemy and a ground one. These should be "universal battlefield vehicles" capable of replacing both tanks and infantry fighting vehicles and partly air defense support.
    1. Sergey Aleksandrovich
      Sergey Aleksandrovich 11 May 2021 20: 49
      0
      Of course, it is interesting to replace the air defense in part, but then the BMP with a 57 mm cannon must be made with a two-link, in order to drag ammunition for firing at drones with a trailer. It will not look very good, the Arctic option is not impressive.
    2. Kot_Kuzya
      Kot_Kuzya 11 May 2021 22: 55
      -1
      Quote: Snail N9
      sets the task of a radical revision of the role of classic armored vehicles and the creation of completely new vehicles that are highly protected from attacks from above and capable of fighting both an air enemy and a ground one. These should be "universal battlefield vehicles" capable of replacing both tanks and infantry fighting vehicles and partly air defense support.

      Have you re-read Tukhachevsky or Khrushchev? Again, raving began about universal vehicles that would replace three-in-one tanks, infantry fighting vehicles, and ZSU. I remember that Tukhachevsky also raved about a universal weapon capable of replacing a divisional gun, an anti-tank gun and an anti-aircraft gun. Khrushchev raved about a universal combat vehicle that would replace both a surface ship and a submarine, and which could still fly.
      1. Snail N9
        Snail N9 12 May 2021 09: 23
        -1
        A tank with a long-barreled anti-tank gun has outlived its usefulness. Modern technologies make it possible to hit the tank with maneuvering ammunition in all projections and especially from above. The tank and other armored vehicles are not protected from above. A long-barreled anti-tank gun is not needed - it just gets in the way. Especially on rough terrain and in settlements. The tank is not needed as it is now! This concept is outdated. Talking about Tukhachevsky and Khrushchev in this regard - well, this ... Progress does not stand still and what was impossible in their time is quite feasible now.
      2. Sergey Aleksandrovich
        Sergey Aleksandrovich 13 May 2021 21: 08
        0
        In history, everything is not so simple. A little later, recoilless guns, the same dynamo-rocket guns from Tukhachevsky, very successfully fought both light armored vehicles and enemy infantry. And in modern conditions, air defense is very important, until drones learned to burn with lasers. And the purpose of the gun is largely determined by the sight, ammunition and the fire control system.
  • Barberry25
    Barberry25 11 May 2021 20: 29
    -1
    is when the USA fit into something?
  • Artemion3
    Artemion3 11 May 2021 08: 34
    +1
    Quote: Kot_Kuzya
    Modern generals are again trying to combine two in one: a tank and an infantry fighting vehicle. They completely do not take into account the experiments of 90 years ago, when they tried to sculpt two, or even three in one: wheeled-tracked tanks, multi-turret tanks, tanks with two guns. You can't make a racing car out of a tank, but you don't need it. In the same way, it is impossible from a tank or from an infantry fighting vehicle to make a vehicle with protection like a tank, and carrying an infantry squad, and at the same time having a weight and cost within reasonable limits. I generally don't see any reason to make an BMP with protection like a tank, because the infantry will still fight on dismounted, in which case there is no point in such heavy protection of the BMP.

    Rather, they will go by reducing the landing and strengthening the armor as on the German cougar
    1. Kot_Kuzya
      Kot_Kuzya 11 May 2021 09: 04
      -3
      Quote: Artemion3
      Rather, they will go by reducing the landing and strengthening the armor as on the German cougar

      But the landing should be clearly more than 4 people. The landing commander, three submachine gunners, a machine gunner, a sniper, a grenade launcher, an assistant grenade launcher - now there are 8 people.
      1. Sergey Aleksandrovich
        Sergey Aleksandrovich 11 May 2021 12: 20
        +1
        This is where everything becomes flexible. Submachine gunners can be turned into machine gunners, armed with RPK-16 or RPL-20, and in some operations they will prefer grenade launchers with GM-94, already without an assistant.
    2. Barberry25
      Barberry25 11 May 2021 20: 31
      0
      laughing but here is another problem .. the price of a full-fledged BMP will be, say, 8 cartoons, and a small one 5 cartoons .. as a result, instead of 8 million, you will have to pay 10 million to carry troops ... Here it is optional to have 2 types of BMP in general, for heavy brigades based on tanks combined arms, which are simpler and lighter ...
  • OgnennyiKotik
    OgnennyiKotik 11 May 2021 08: 41
    +1
    The military wanted to see not just a new BMP, but an armored vehicle with a complex of revolutionary solutions.

    This is the correct approach. Bradley, after all the modernizations, at the world level, medium tracked armored personnel carriers / infantry fighting vehicles, qualitatively better than it. Only in the heavy class there is something better, but there is no point in adopting BMP / armored personnel carriers heavier than 36-38 tons due to the decrease in aeromobility.
    1. Artemion3
      Artemion3 11 May 2021 08: 55
      0
      Well Bradley is also not particularly airmobile, they have a striker for this
      1. OgnennyiKotik
        OgnennyiKotik 11 May 2021 09: 03
        0
        The Stryker is designed to fit a C-130 with its 19-21 tonnes of payload, two Bradleys fit in a C-17 with a maximum payload of 77,5 tonnes. Accordingly, if the BMP is heavier than 38 tons, the S-17 will be able to lift only one, like Abrams for example. This is one of the reasons for creating a new "light" tank.
    2. Sergey Aleksandrovich
      Sergey Aleksandrovich 11 May 2021 12: 32
      +2
      This does not have them, for wars in an expeditionary spirit, but for us it is quite important, just for the fight against their heavy APMs. Only a vehicle in the spirit of the T-15 armed with a 57 mm cannon of high ballistics can successfully resist Bradley, not taking into account the duel on the ATGM.
    3. Sergey Aleksandrovich
      Sergey Aleksandrovich 11 May 2021 14: 00
      +1
      On the border with the Rostov region, air mobility is not particularly required, there are more people traveling there by rail.
  • Alexey RA
    Alexey RA 11 May 2021 10: 20
    +2
    According to calculations, it was supposed to be a 60-ton highly protected vehicle, which the troops were counting on in 2020. As you know, nothing sensible came of this. Largely due to excessive demands on the machine. The military wanted to see not just a new BMP, but an armored vehicle with a complex of revolutionary solutions. The BMP was supposed to be guaranteed to protect the crew and nine paratroopers from all angles from 30-mm shells, ATGMs, mines and RPGs. High mobility was provided by a hybrid power plant, and a promising 40-50-mm gun was responsible for the increased firepower.

    Spawn this did not happen, and again the same thing! ©
    Did they decide to go over all the rakes laid out since the development of "Bradley"?
    1. flc9800
      flc9800 12 May 2021 17: 20
      0
      Great movie! wink
  • CastroRuiz
    CastroRuiz 11 May 2021 13: 35
    0
    The license for Lynx KF41 wiggled the very best solution.
    And the Bradley, like the BMP-1 and 2, is obsolete morally and technically. There is no longer any possibility of modernization to the level and functionality of the XNUMXst century.
    Yes, the technique is cold, there is nothing to do.
  • Ros 56
    Ros 56 11 May 2021 13: 50
    +1
    The lack of armor is bad, but a small problem, but the lack of adequate brains, that's a problem, that's a problem.
  • yehat2
    yehat2 11 May 2021 14: 32
    -1
    Quote: Professor
    Or should I tell you again?

    you are making progress, you remembered that the m3 modification was
    there is very little left to remember everything. You don't need to tell me - just remember.
  • Alf
    Alf 11 May 2021 19: 21
    +1
    With the A5 model, the imagination of customers and developers was played out in earnest. The package included a laser cannon, surface-to-air missiles for countering drones and new DZ and KAZ systems. The car will be thoroughly blocked from the inside. They will strengthen the mine protection of the bottom, as well as transfer the ammunition storage to a less vulnerable place. 3rd generation thermal imagers, automatic target tracking and friend or foe detection are also included in the Bradley M2A5 configuration list.

    Reminiscent of the plot of the Pentagon Wars movie.
  • Reserve buildbat
    Reserve buildbat 11 May 2021 22: 16
    0
    The Pentagon Wars 2 began filming.
  • Pavel57
    Pavel57 11 May 2021 22: 59
    -1
    Quote: Artemion3
    They were blown up, but all remained intact, tk. they are not armored personnel carriers, namely wheeled infantry fighting vehicles both in weight and in armor, but they cannot swim.

    BMP-2D also did not know how to swim.
    1. Sergey Aleksandrovich
      Sergey Aleksandrovich 13 May 2021 16: 45
      0
      They were used where it was not required.