Military Review

Two decades of benefits and challenges. US Army abandons the M1128 wheeled tank

67

M1128 MGS armored vehicles during maintenance, 2006


At the beginning of the XNUMXs, the US Army received the first "wheeled Tanks»M1128 Mobile Gun System (MGS) based on Stryker chassis. In the future, such equipment was mass-produced, distributed between different units and was actively used in real operations for fire support of infantry units. After almost two decades of service, the command again evaluated the M1128 machines and now decided to abandon them.

Fire support


In the late nineties, the Pentagon decided to purchase a large number of armored vehicles of the Stryker family, made on the basis of the Canadian LAV III armored personnel carrier. The general chassis was proposed to be used as the basis for an armored personnel carrier, reconnaissance vehicle, commander, etc. A special place in the family was to take the M1128 MGS fire support combat vehicle.

For the M1128, an original fighting compartment with a gun mount was developed. Inside the hull, the crew's workplaces and part of the ammunition were placed, and outside there was a swinging artillery unit with all weapons and loading equipment.


M1128 with additional protection before being transferred to Afghanistan, 2008

The armored vehicle was armed with a 105 mm M68A1E4 rifled gun with remote control of all processes. The automatic loader and stowage inside the hull contained 18 unitary rounds. The rate of fire was provided at the level of 10 rds / min. Additional armament included an M240 machine gun and smoke grenade launchers.

To support the infantry and combat a wide range of targets, the M1128 had to use four types of shells for different purposes. These were the armor-piercing sub-caliber M900, the high-explosive fragmentation M456, the shrapnel M1040 and the high-explosive armor-piercing M393.

The "wheeled tank" M1128 MGS went into production at the same time as other "Strykers", in 2002. Production continued until 2010, and by that time more than 140 vehicles had been built. This technique was intended to strengthen the infantry formations on Stryker armored personnel carriers. One fire support vehicle was assigned to each platoon, and each company provided a platoon with three self-propelled guns.


Since 2003, the M1128 has regularly participated in military operations and carried out real combat missions. During operation, both advantages and disadvantages were noted, and in general MGS was considered a fairly successful model. In addition, during combat operations, such equipment showed high stability and survivability: only three armored vehicles were lost for the entire time. Several more had to be written off due to breakdowns, and at the moment the US Army has 134 cannon Strykers.

According to the latest decisions, their number will be reduced in the near future. Until the end of 2022, the army will completely abandon such equipment due to moral and physical obsolescence, as well as due to the inexpediency of further development.

Exploitation and criticism


It should be recalled that the Stryker family of equipment was criticized already at the stage of project development, and some of the claims were justified and objective. Some of them were taken into account in the further modernization of equipment.

One of the first in practice was the problem of overheating of the habitable volume, as well as components and assemblies. It manifested itself especially clearly when working in the hot climates of Iraq or Afghanistan. Initially, it was partially solved with the help of cooling vests for the crew, but the equipment continued to overheat.


Shooting practice with the participation of the modernized MGS - the external block of the air conditioner is visible on board

Only by the end of the XNUMXs, this problem received a full-fledged solution. During the planned repairs, MGS cars began to be equipped with a full-fledged air conditioner, which removes excess heat and cools the internal compartments. The equipment after such a modernization could be distinguished by a characteristic casing with a fan battery on the left side, near the engine compartment.

During operation and combat use, all Strykers faced common problems. It turned out that the equipment is overweight, and the standard power plant does not always cope with the load, which causes problems with cross-country ability. In some situations, large dimensions and a high center of gravity turned out to be a problem. At the same time, the correction of such shortcomings required a significant revision of the project, which was considered impossible.

In Iraq and Afghanistan, improvised explosive devices have become one of the main threats to American armored vehicles. In this regard, the armored personnel carrier and some other Stryker vehicles received a new underbody protection with double V-shaped armor. The installation of similar protection on other samples of the family, including the M1128 MGS, was abandoned, which led to the preservation of well-known risks.

The limited number of vehicles built was a negative factor. 140 cannon armored vehicles were not enough to fully re-equip all "striker" units and formations. Accordingly, a significant part of them were left without an effective large-caliber fire support.


The moment after the shot. The discarded sleeve is visible on the left.

However, the insufficient number and technical shortcomings were compensated for by rather high combat indicators. The 105-mm cannon with an automatic loader and a wide selection of shells has proven to be a convenient means of fire support, which is an advantageous addition to other cannon armaments of motorized infantry.

The story ends


A few days ago, the Pentagon announced its intention to retire the M1128 "wheeled tanks". The army studied the situation and came to the conclusion that such a step was necessary. At the same time, she managed to find ways to maintain the firepower of the units at the required level after abandoning the 105-mm cannons on a wheeled chassis.

The army believes that the M1128 MGS is outdated by now. The presence of certain systemic problems in the line of the gun and the automatic loader is also noted, which complicates and increases the cost of operation. In addition, the disadvantage remains in the absence of mine protection like other machines of the Stryker family.

Correcting all these shortcomings on the 134 existing machines was considered impractical. Therefore, it is proposed to get rid of them within the next one and a half years. The stock of parts and assemblies for the M1128 will be used with other equipment from the family. The funds and resources required for the operation of MGS are proposed to be redirected to other projects with real prospects.


One of the main tasks now is to maintain the "lethality" of infantry units at the same level. For this, it is proposed to develop existing combat modules with 30-mm cannons by improving fire control means. Development will receive projects of combat units Medium Caliber Weapons System and Common Remotely Operated Weapons Station-Javelin.

It is assumed that such weapon systems will become a full-fledged replacement for the 105-mm cannon with a set of ammunition. At the same time, advantages are expected in the form of increased ammunition and increased flexibility of use, due to the presence of small-caliber guns, machine guns and missiles. Thus, new models of equipment will be able to effectively solve the main tasks of the current M1128, but they will do it by different means and methods.

Natural result


It is obvious that the life cycle of a new model of military equipment cannot be infinite, and sooner or later it will have to be removed from service due to moral and physical obsolescence. The presence of congenital defects or the manifestation of additional problems during operation can speed up these processes and bring the end of service date closer.

The M1128 MGS "wheeled tank" entered service in 2002 and will be decommissioned in 2022. Despite all the objective shortcomings and problems, this machine was able to gain a foothold in the troops for two decades, which in itself can be considered a success. However, the Mobile Gun System is still being removed from service - unlike other samples of the Stryker family, which managed to undergo modernization and now have to remain in the army until a full replacement appears.
Author:
Photos used:
U.S. Army
67 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. The leader of the Redskins
    The leader of the Redskins 26 May 2021 18: 20
    +4
    I like wheeled tanks! I do not know why, but they like it!
    From childhood I "got sick" with them. And the most beloved is the one that was made from our BTR 60 in Cuba!) laughing
    1. OgnennyiKotik
      OgnennyiKotik 26 May 2021 18: 37
      +6
      Yes, there is something attractive about them. Hussars from tanks.
    2. English tarantas
      English tarantas 26 May 2021 21: 09
      0
      Wow, interesting, I did not know about this, I will go google and ask the forum for tanks to do it.
      1. The leader of the Redskins
        The leader of the Redskins 26 May 2021 21: 46
        +1
        Are you talking about Cuban crafts? Google their self-propelled guns. What are they only on the basis of T34, BRDM and Kraz did not create!)))
  2. OgnennyiKotik
    OgnennyiKotik 26 May 2021 18: 24
    +5
    The M1128 has too many differences from the combat strikers, which makes them a separate type of vehicle. The logic of the mono brigades is broken, you need to support 2 different machines. And it is expensive to do a separate project for 134 cars. Plus, the system of loading and firing is really very complicated, it was not for nothing that it was the only serial "tank" in the world with a completely uninhabited turret.


    Besides, the light brigades are planning to adopt a full-fledged "light" tank. For reinforcement and Stryker teams can be given.
    1. garri-lin
      garri-lin 26 May 2021 20: 42
      +1
      More precisely, since we were doing a separate project, we could do it normally. Recycle the housing. Place the guns closer to the ground. The machine is simpler.
    2. Angry Alt-Right
      Angry Alt-Right 26 May 2021 20: 42
      +3
      On the topic of adding such a light tank - you are clearly excited! laughing
      All the same, wheeled vehicles are less harmful to the road infrastructure. Not a single caravan of trucks, if necessary, after such a "light tracked tank" will not pass.
      Proven by Vietnam!
      Yes, and such a "tank" will be light only in comparison with the Abrams. The best thing that can be here is a car with the same speed, flotation and weight as the Stryker. Maybe a wheeled drone with a large caliber, but this is already my speculation.
    3. Sergey Aleksandrovich
      Sergey Aleksandrovich 27 May 2021 10: 51
      +3
      A beautiful video on the action of the automatic loader, but the main drawback is also visible from it. To reload, the gun barrel must be installed along the axis of the armored vehicle. That is, the reload time is long enough, and there are almost no advantages over conventional artillery self-propelled guns.
      1. OgnennyiKotik
        OgnennyiKotik 27 May 2021 10: 57
        -1
        In this regard, I really like our carousel AZ. The same Bakhcha. They should be more reliable.
        1. Sergey Aleksandrovich
          Sergey Aleksandrovich 27 May 2021 11: 03
          0
          For a 100 mm gun from "Bakhchi" there is a very modest choice of ammunition, there is no shrapnel or thermobaric ammunition.
      2. abrakadabre
        abrakadabre 28 May 2021 07: 13
        +3
        but the main drawback is also visible from it.
        and two more:
        2. Limited ammunition for such a mobile platform, which gives the units, again, high mobility.
        3. Small angle of maximum elevation. Fire, practically, only direct fire. Considering the level of armor is much lower than that of the tank, this is very bad. The platform is large, high. On direct fire, it will perfectly unmask and attract return fire.
  3. Vladimir_2U
    Vladimir_2U 26 May 2021 18: 29
    +5
    However, the Mobile Gun System is still being removed from service - unlike other samples of the Stryker family, which managed to undergo modernization and now have to remain in the army until a full replacement appears.
    And they also did not collide with real tanks.
    1. Sergey Aleksandrovich
      Sergey Aleksandrovich 27 May 2021 12: 18
      +4
      This is a colonial model, with a long reload time and light armor, against a notoriously weak enemy. Prancing along highways and dirt roads. In real combat operations, an ordinary self-propelled gun like Carnation or Acacia will cope with its functions, and even better, given the cross-country ability and a larger angle of elevation of the barrel.
      1. Protos
        Protos 27 May 2021 17: 10
        +1
        Even BZT 12,7mm sews it in the forehead laughing
      2. Blackgrifon
        Blackgrifon 27 May 2021 18: 11
        0
        Quote: Sergey Alexandrovich
        common self-propelled gun like Carnation or Acacia

        In general, different tasks and purposes in comparison with Carnation and Acacia.
        By the way, in the USSR / Russia, when they worked on Sting and Octopus, for which colonies were they planned? Or maybe you should pay attention to the fact that the Cannon Ratchels fought well against the T-55/62, and the French chariots were used, among other things, during the Gulf War. Maybe we will no longer replicate this stamp about "colonial"?
        1. Sergey Aleksandrovich
          Sergey Aleksandrovich 27 May 2021 20: 26
          0
          And where are some cannon Rathel fought well against the T-62, I would like to know? The model is purely colonial, and the fact that the Americans did not dare to use it in real battles confirms this. A rattletrap with such a loading system has almost no chance against the T-62, whose production ended 30 years before its appearance. The whole idea of ​​creating such a machine is to save motor resources in places where no serious resistance is expected.
          And Acacia and Gvozdika with a larger caliber will easily solve the problems of this defective tank on wheels.
          1. Blackgrifon
            Blackgrifon 27 May 2021 22: 35
            +1
            They worked against the T-55 and took into account the possibility of the appearance of the T-62. Ruikat was already being developed against the T-72 South Africa.
            Sergey! You know very well that Acacia is not a tank. From the word completely, and using it as a fire support machine is like hammering nails with a microscope - it is possible, but undesirable. And it’s not safe.
            Yes, this striker is inferior in protection to full-fledged tanks, but as an anti-tank weapon and a means of reinforcing infantry and shock brigades, the vehicle could work. And due to its weight, it could be easily transported.
            And so, yes - you are right that this cannon stalker is an emphasis on economy, since the Yankees initially wanted a full-fledged light tank, and among other wheeled tanks, the M1128 probably has the lowest performance characteristics.
            1. Sergey Aleksandrovich
              Sergey Aleksandrovich 28 May 2021 09: 56
              0
              A strange comparison of a self-propelled howitzer with a microscope. It is several times cheaper than a tank, equipped with a sight for direct fire, in its arsenal there is a shrapnel shell, which the T-72 tank gun does not have. Are you ashamed of something or someone? I would understand the indignation about direct fire when using Hyacinth, Msta or Coalition. But with Acacia, what misunderstandings may be, it is intended to support, including directly.
              And you did not answer where the "Ratel" wheeled tanks managed to fight the T-62? Maybe in a computer game?
              1. Blackgrifon
                Blackgrifon 28 May 2021 16: 20
                0
                Answered but you ignored:
                Quote: Blackgrifon
                They worked against the T-55 and took into account the possibility of the appearance of the T-62. Ruikat was already being developed against the T-72 South Africa.

                Even add, it was not just taken into account, but the T-62 was directly used in Angola, when the aggression of South Africa was reflected.

                Quote: Sergey Alexandrovich
                It is several times cheaper than a tank, equipped with a sight for direct fire, in its arsenal there is a shrapnel shell, which the T-72 tank gun does not have.

                No less strange than comparing a fire support vehicle with a full-fledged self-propelled gun.
                The tank also has the ability to fire from a closed position, but it does not become a self-propelled gun from this.
                1. Sergey Aleksandrovich
                  Sergey Aleksandrovich 29 May 2021 21: 12
                  -1
                  And what, from this "accounting" of yours, did the South African armored personnel carrier have at least some chances against the T-62? And against the T-55, these chances are, to put it mildly, dubious.
                  ACS "Akatsiya" has a caliber of 152 mm and in high-explosive effect is significantly superior to the shell of a tank gun, and therefore it was widely used for support. I won't be mistaken if I assume that you have no idea about its practical application. Most likely it was not used against enemy tanks, but very even for direct fire.
                  And shooting from a tank along a hinged trajectory, this is your invention, probably you have seen enough of a movie about the Great Patriotic War. At the same T-62, the angle of elevation of the barrel is 16 degrees. Are you going to shoot a lot?
                  1. Blackgrifon
                    Blackgrifon 29 May 2021 21: 30
                    0
                    Quote: Sergey Alexandrovich
                    And what, from this "accounting" of yours, did the South African armored personnel carrier have at least some chances against the T-62? And against the T-55, these chances are, to put it mildly, dubious.

                    Once, in the end, they developed a car with 105 and 76 mm (which eventually went into production when they realized that the T-72 was unlikely to appear), then there were chances. Moreover, the ratels with 90 mm faced the T-55 more than once.
                    Quote: Sergey Alexandrovich
                    ... Most likely it was not used against enemy tanks, but very even for direct fire.

                    Applied. Only not always with a positive result. You could just as well say that the SU-76 was successfully (often not) used instead of tanks. And if everything were so simple, then the Union would not bother with Norov and Octopus.

                    The bottom line is that we are arguing about warm and soft: 1128 was developed as a light aerial vehicle / anti-tank gun / fire support vehicle. This is not an SPG, not an MBT. And it will be inferior to a full-fledged self-propelled gun (the same Paladin) in range and power of the shot, but it significantly surpasses it as an anti-tank weapon, in mobility and resource.
                    1. Sergey Aleksandrovich
                      Sergey Aleksandrovich 29 May 2021 21: 42
                      -1
                      ACS were used for direct fire, not always with a positive result? Do you understand what you write, did they miss? If the self-propelled guns were put on direct fire, then this made sense, and the 152 mm projectile simply cannot be unsuccessful.
                      Is this thinking the result of computer games or an excessive passion for movies?
                      1128 is superior to SPGs in mobility and as an anti-tank weapon? Can a wheeled tank be an anti-tank weapon? Against whom or what, against the T-90 or the T-72, can this be taken seriously?
                      Are you going to use this against the T-72 or at least the T-62?
                      1. Blackgrifon
                        Blackgrifon 29 May 2021 21: 59
                        0
                        Quote: Sergey Alexandrovich
                        ACS were used for direct fire, not always with a positive result? Do you understand what you write, did they miss? If the self-propelled guns were put on direct fire, then this made sense, and the 152 mm projectile simply cannot be unsuccessful.
                        Is this thinking the result of computer games or an excessive passion for movies?


                        Do not be rude.
                        In order for a 152 mm projectile to become "successful", it is necessary for the self-propelled guns to reach - in the city, where there are heaps of rubble and firing points. And this is in a car, which is inferior in armor to the BTR-80. By the way, attempts to use the ACS in this way in PCHV led to losses. The self-propelled guns burned in Syria when they were used in this way.
                        Quote: Sergey Alexandrovich
                        Can a wheeled tank be an anti-tank weapon? Against whom or what, against the T-90 or the T-72, can this be taken seriously?
                        Are you going to use this against the T-72 or at least the T-62?

                        I will not even comment on this. Read at least a little about wheeled tanks. And about our work on Norov, and then on Octopus.

                        By the way, does the fact that we still have rapiers (which are approximately equal to 105 mm to the western one) in anti-tank units in service do not bother you? Do they know, too, in the forehead Abrams / T-27B and T-80 will not take.
                      2. Sergey Aleksandrovich
                        Sergey Aleksandrovich 29 May 2021 22: 10
                        -2
                        The level of discussion has been clarified to the end.
                        Octopus, it is for the landing, it is floating on tracks and with a tank gun.
                        Rapier, it is smooth-bore and not roughly equal to the rifled 105, it has a significantly higher muzzle velocity.
                        And what do you have with the Syrian experience and experience in the PCV? Share, can anyone take care of and remove the sights for direct fire from equipment.
                        If in South Africa they reasoned the same way as you, I am not surprised at their defeat in the end, putting a wheeled tank in a duel against the T-62 is something, this is not a computer game, there will be no spare life. You run the risk of angering the tanker, he will climb out of the tower and turn the wheeled tank into a sieve from an anti-aircraft DShK.
                      3. Blackgrifon
                        Blackgrifon 29 May 2021 22: 40
                        0
                        Quote: Sergey Alexandrovich
                        The level of discussion has been clarified to the end.
                        Octopus, it is for the landing,

                        That's definitely figured out. The Octopus was originally developed as a self-propelled replacement for the Rapier, for the Marines and Airborne Forces. It was only later, when the Union collapsed, he went only for the latter. And the plans to equip them with SV and naval vessels were closed.
                        Quote: Sergey Alexandrovich
                        maybe someone will be worried and remove the sights for direct fire from the equipment.

                        Or maybe we will replace tanks, BMPTs, etc. with acacias and carnations?

                        Quote: Sergey Alexandrovich
                        If in South Africa they reasoned the same way as you, I am not surprised at their defeat in the end, putting a wheeled tank in a duel against the T-62 is something, this is not a computer game, there will be no spare life. You run the risk of angering the tanker, he will climb out of the tower and turn the wheeled tank into a sieve from an anti-aircraft DShK.

                        The tanker is a smart man and for some reason does not like to climb out to the waist to shoot from a machine gun when meeting with armored vehicles ...
                        In addition to South Africa, France, Italy, Japan, China are also actively interested in wheeled tanks. Work on them was going on in the Union, Germany.
                      4. Sergey Aleksandrovich
                        Sergey Aleksandrovich 29 May 2021 22: 46
                        -2
                        Who told you that artillery self-propelled guns are intended to replace tanks? You yourself come up with a thesis and argue with it yourself.
                        ACS have been used and are still being used for direct fire, it is unlikely that you will be able to prohibit this or shame anyone. And for direct fire, they are much better suited to wheeled tanks, due to a much more powerful weapon.
                      5. Blackgrifon
                        Blackgrifon 29 May 2021 23: 06
                        0
                        The fact of the matter is that in the end we return to where we started:
                        Quote: Blackgrifon
                        In general, different tasks and purposes in comparison with Carnation and Acacia.

                        And the fact that self-propelled guns are sometimes used for direct fire, so I did not argue with you about this - they are used when there is nothing more suitable at hand, but necessary. But only I have been trying for an hour to convey the idea that self-propelled guns and wheeled armored vehicles a la M1128 have different purposes, have their pros and cons. And the fact that the SPG has a larger caliber, etc. does not make it a machine that can effectively solve problems that are presented to classmates M1128.
                        So it turns out that we are conducting a dispute about warm and soft. I propose to finish this holivar.
                      6. Sergey Aleksandrovich
                        Sergey Aleksandrovich 29 May 2021 23: 31
                        -1
                        Oh really? And who then compared a self-propelled gun with a microscope and was going to put a wheeled tank from South Africa into battle against the T-62? It's hard to even imagine what the wheeled tank will turn into after being hit by a high-explosive fragmentation projectile from the T-62.
                      7. Blackgrifon
                        Blackgrifon 30 May 2021 10: 41
                        0
                        Quote: Sergey Alexandrovich
                        was going to put a wheeled tank from South Africa into battle against the T-62?

                        Again 25. They were used against our Teshek. Read a little. Bye.
  • 123456789
    123456789 26 May 2021 18: 55
    -4
    withdrawal of troops from Afghanistan! The day before yesterday - F-22! Yesterday - Tikondirogi! Today - F-35! Deja vu!
    And now the tanks!
    And this is still Putin and Biden did not meet.
  • Thrifty
    Thrifty 26 May 2021 20: 24
    -4
    On this version, the dough was cut, now the next sawing self-propelled gun is next in line for the coming years!
  • English tarantas
    English tarantas 26 May 2021 21: 08
    +1
    will refuse such equipment due to moral and physical obsolescence

    BMP-1 is crying quietly in a dark corner.
    new models of equipment will be able to effectively solve the main tasks of the current M1128, but they will do it by different means and methods

    Aha, more expensive. 30mm will not replace 105, even with air blast, because blasting one 105mm above a trench or near a corner is much better than several 30mm, and the M900 projectile has a pretty good penetration, and most importantly, it is much cheaper than a javelin and quickly and guaranteed to overtake the target.
    1. voyaka uh
      voyaka uh 27 May 2021 09: 44
      0
      "30mm will not replace 105, even with air blast" ///
      ---
      I agree. The biggest challenge: to break through the concrete structures of houses
      in the building area. Fighters or enemy soldiers are usually hiding behind them.
      Only 105 mm can handle this.
      And without such an opportunity, full support for the infantry is impossible.
      1. Dmitry V.
        Dmitry V. 27 May 2021 10: 12
        +4
        Quote: voyaka uh
        Only 105 mm can handle this.
        And without such an opportunity, full support for the infantry is impossible.


        There is a more versatile 57 mm solution.


        No wonder the ZSU-57-2 was called a hellish thresher.

        And the Air Defense Derivation will be a very good means of supporting the infantry.

        Of course, the power of the 57 and 105 ammunition is not comparable.
        But the rate of fire (suppression fire) has its own advantage over fire to kill.
        1. voyaka uh
          voyaka uh 27 May 2021 10: 26
          +4
          57 is better than 30mm. No doubt about it.
          But the fundamental question with the support of the infantry is whether the gun can penetrate the concrete wall of the bunker.
          I mean a field bunker, assembled as a lego from several imported structures in the shape of the letter P. And sometimes concrete "walls" of channels.
          Concrete frames of houses have about the same thickness and strength.
          In caliber 105 mm, high-explosive high-explosive projectiles have been developed. The jet breaks through the concrete, a piece of a projectile with explosives and shrapnel flies inside.
          Complete defeat of manpower.
          Merkava is shot like this, for example, as subcaliber for its 120 mm.
          I don't know if there are such projectiles for 57-60 mm. The diameter of the cumm of the funnel is too small.
          1. Dmitry V.
            Dmitry V. 27 May 2021 10: 50
            +4
            Quote: voyaka uh
            I don't know if there are such projectiles for 57-60 mm. The diameter of the cumm of the funnel is too small.


            The cumulative effect of 120 and 57 mm - there is no sense to compare. About the Israeli HEAT shell, I watched "Weapons of the Future" in the program cycle - this is an elegant solution :).

            57 mm at an initial speed of 1000 m / s, penetrates 70-80 mm of homogeneous armor with an armor-piercing blank - i.e. reinforced concrete walls are guaranteed to break through. Moreover, a standard concrete box - 2 walls of reinforced concrete of 100 mm each - is right through, which is not very tight for special operations.
            At the same time, a certain shrapnel effect from 3-4x 57 mm shells that pierced a concrete wall with an interval of several seconds is very demoralizing, but of course there is no question of 100% armor damage, in this case, of course.
            The possibility of creating an effective high-explosive armor-piercing projectile on the basis of a 57 mm projectile seems to me questionable (insufficient volume / density of explosives / mass of a projectile), at best, armor-piercing incendiary.
            I think applied R&D will put everything in its place.
          2. Barberry25
            Barberry25 27 May 2021 17: 07
            0
            thermobar to help you .. put the ATGM, AGS in 40 mm and hang 23 mm am-23 to the heap on the panoramic viewer .. and the mustache ... the thresher on the go ..
        2. Sergey Aleksandrovich
          Sergey Aleksandrovich 27 May 2021 10: 42
          +1
          Then the 57-mm cannon from the Air Defense Derivation should be installed on the Boomerang chassis, and not the BMP-3. Then you can get more protection and move along asphalt roads without destroying them.
          1. Dmitry V.
            Dmitry V. 27 May 2021 11: 09
            +3
            Quote: Sergey Alexandrovich
            Then the 57-mm cannon from the Air Defense Derivation should be installed on the Boomerang chassis, and not the BMP-3. Then you can get more protection and move along asphalt roads without destroying them.


            So they put:

            Combat module.
            1. Sergey Aleksandrovich
              Sergey Aleksandrovich 27 May 2021 11: 13
              +2
              I have not seen this yet! A good vehicle for escorting convoys, both as protection against air attacks and against ambushes in mountainous areas and urban multi-storey buildings.
              I myself wrote about asphalt roads and immediately began to doubt that in our city even trolleybuses push the track, not like this heavy transporter.
            2. English tarantas
              English tarantas 27 May 2021 12: 15
              +2
              Only this is not a boomerang
        3. English tarantas
          English tarantas 27 May 2021 12: 15
          0
          Still, 57 is also not 105, the power of ammunition grows exponentially with increasing caliber. Yes, and no matter how lerivation shoots the entire bk on something that can be solved with two or three 105, although it also weighs
        4. OgnennyiKotik
          OgnennyiKotik 27 May 2021 12: 48
          -3
          Quote: Dmitry Vladimirovich
          There is a more versatile 57 mm solution.

          They have a 50mm autocannon with telescopic projectiles. In terms of power, it is close to our 57 mm. But there is already a question of the price of a shot and a new type of projectile in the range of weapons. They will find 30mm shells in any hole.
          1. abrakadabre
            abrakadabre 28 May 2021 07: 50
            0
            But there is already a question of the price of a shot and a new type of projectile in the range of weapons.
            There is one more important point for database maintenance: the volume of ammunition carried and the possibility of its replenishment. Yes, small calibers have much more ammunition. But the power is much lower. Which requires a high flow rate. As mentioned above, where one 105 is enough, you will have to hammer with a dozen, or even more than 50. And the subsequent replenishment of the BC for highly mobile parts can be a problem.
      2. Sergey Aleksandrovich
        Sergey Aleksandrovich 27 May 2021 10: 29
        +3
        Not only 105mm can handle this. If it is necessary to destroy concrete structures, then the ACS Acacia with its 152 mm will cope with this even better.
        1. fsb_buzuk
          fsb_buzuk 27 May 2021 10: 48
          0
          It is necessary to advise the Americans to buy Acacia wink
          1. Sergey Aleksandrovich
            Sergey Aleksandrovich 27 May 2021 10: 53
            +3
            They are only in the export, emasculated version and at double the price. In Afghanistan, it was Acacia that was used as such for artillery support of the infantry.
        2. abrakadabre
          abrakadabre 28 May 2021 07: 51
          +1
          ACS Acacia launched directly into the fire with its 152 mm
          produces an indelible moral impact on the enemy being hit.
      3. English tarantas
        English tarantas 27 May 2021 12: 21
        +1
        This is your specificity, it looks like you have a house there, but in fact the basement is a bunker, but you need to work precisely because of the high probability of hurting civilians. In most cases, the army, under normal conditions, and not chasing scourges through the cities of the desert, does not meet excessively strong structures, there are usually residential private houses, and a line of 30mm can be sewn well. And the fact that the fortified will be worked out by something more difficult. Yes, and there is no need to break through the walls either, it is better to immediately throw it out the window, there it will break the walls, the house will fold, again, if not as with whips, they will cling to each house and turn it into a bunker, there is no choice.
        1. voyaka uh
          voyaka uh 27 May 2021 12: 43
          +2
          This is a universal practice.
          Urbanization. The area is densely built up.
          Houses are now built about the same everywhere.
          And everyone builds defense in urban areas in about the same way:
          that guerrillas / fighters, that the regular army.
          1. Sergey Aleksandrovich
            Sergey Aleksandrovich 27 May 2021 13: 04
            +1
            Hardly anyone will go to the city on this contraption, they need a full-fledged tank with solid armor, capable, if anything, of crushing a tree and a fence, and demolishing a shed.
            Judging by the losses, the Americans understood what was what, and did not even try to fight on it.
            1. voyaka uh
              voyaka uh 27 May 2021 15: 34
              +1
              It's right. I see such a wheeled tank as an MBT assistant. Auxiliary tank "second plan" for cleaning firing points.
              But he also needs KAZ from ATGM / RPG.
              1. Sergey Aleksandrovich
                Sergey Aleksandrovich 27 May 2021 15: 47
                +1
                And here he is not good. The tank needs an assistant with a 57-76 mm automatic cannon while reloading its own gun. And this wheeled tank has all the shortcomings of the main tank, and even less protected. So it is quite right to refuse it.
            2. English tarantas
              English tarantas 27 May 2021 16: 19
              0
              M1128 weighs about 20 tons, if memory serves, it can take down a small shed, a fence, and even a not very old tree. But yes, you won't let it into the city, the UVN are very meager, the car is clumsy, there will be many places where the wheels will get stuck.
              1. Sergey Aleksandrovich
                Sergey Aleksandrovich 27 May 2021 16: 35
                0
                If the mass is so small, then there will be problems not only with UHN, there will be problems with stability, and with UGN.
          2. English tarantas
            English tarantas 27 May 2021 16: 16
            0
            Yes, houses are now being built in the same way, panels, cinder blocks in 1 layer or even from chipboard and insulation, you can not tell me. I wrote that in your conditions they cling to every house and strengthen the buildings, the regular army has no time for this insanity, it is easier either to leave the house and take another one, or turn the whole quarter into a mess. Battles move into cities, but cities and battles in them are always and everywhere different. All these cumulative high-explosive and concrete-piercing landmines with a delay are two ways of how to make a bad bomb and a bad landmine, a conventional landmine with a delay solves all problems, and they came up with a fuse delay at the dawn of firearms, and Ainet was installed on the T-80UK back in the 80s ...
        2. Sergey Aleksandrovich
          Sergey Aleksandrovich 27 May 2021 12: 49
          0
          And if "Bumblebee" is thrown out the window, won't the house be formed?
  • APASUS
    APASUS 27 May 2021 11: 47
    0

    I can imagine how this air conditioner on its side attracts ATGMs, a very controversial decision
    1. Dmitry V.
      Dmitry V. 27 May 2021 11: 57
      0
      Quote: APASUS
      I can imagine how this air conditioner on its side attracts ATGMs, a very controversial decision


      This happens when guys from Canada do for themselves, and the military needs to work in Africa too ...
    2. Sergey Aleksandrovich
      Sergey Aleksandrovich 27 May 2021 12: 08
      0
      And, as a refrigerant, I hope, they used flammable isobutane r600a, which meets modern environmental requirements. lol
      And in general, these tanks are not for fighting the enemy with an armed ATGM, especially judging by the losses over 20 years. Are you going to fight on it or what?
      1. abrakadabre
        abrakadabre 28 May 2021 07: 57
        +1
        And in general, these tanks are not for fighting the enemy with an armed ATGM
        You sealed yourself: not an ATGM, but an RPG. From hitting an ATGM designed to defeat a solid tank, it can simply burst at the seams.
      2. Decimalegio
        Decimalegio 28 May 2021 13: 15
        0
        However, there are not only Russian armed forces in the world. Even if Russia doesn't need it, why can't it be exported ???
        1. Sergey Aleksandrovich
          Sergey Aleksandrovich 29 May 2021 21: 26
          0
          Russia is also unlikely to make it for export in small batches. The sales market is too small and the costs are too high.
  • Max PV
    Max PV 28 May 2021 00: 47
    0
    105mm cannon, bulletproof protection - it's good to drive barmaley or from a distance, but it's better to fight from an ambush with the ancient 54s. With modern infantry fighting vehicles - bash for bash, who will shoot first. In the event of a meeting with a normal MBT - a mass grave with no options.
  • Irbiz123
    Irbiz123 28 May 2021 09: 26
    0
    Here's the crest flooded something! Now arm yourself with modern weapons instead of your plastic tanks
    1. Irbiz123
      Irbiz123 28 May 2021 09: 29
      +1
      And so, the 30 ... 57 mm doubles + ATGMs are out of competition for heavy and medium infantry fighting vehicles. I'm so kaatza.
  • Decimalegio
    Decimalegio 28 May 2021 13: 09
    +2
    Everyone appreciates the merits of cannon armored cars smile