Combat module BM-30-D "Spoke" in production and operation

150
Combat module BM-30-D "Spoke" in production and operation
Layout module BM-30-D arr. 2016 Photo by Central Research Institute Burevestnik


Domestic armored vehicles and other protected equipment can be equipped with weapons and combat modules of various types. In particular, for the armament of light-class armored cars, a remote-controlled combat module 32V01 or BM-30-D, also known under the code “Spoke”, was created several years ago. To date, it has gone into series, is installed on regular carriers and is operated by the troops.



Unified module


The future remotely controlled combat module (DUBM) 32V01 has been developed by the Nizhny Novgorod Central Research Institute Burevestnik since 2015 by order of the Ministry of Defense. The product premiered at the Army-2016 forum. Then for the first time they talked about the existence of the project, and also showed the layout of the DBM and revealed some of its characteristics. In the future, the product was repeatedly demonstrated at domestic and foreign events.

At Army-2017, the BM-30-D module was shown for the first time together with a regular carrier. The platform for its installation was the two-axle armored car K-4386 "Typhoon-VDV". DBM placed on the roof of the building; the turret part of the module was inside the cab. It was reported that by the time of the first show, the armored car with the new module managed to pass part of the tests and confirm some of the characteristics.

It is noteworthy that the project continued to develop. The existing module has undergone the necessary improvements that have affected both its design and appearance. "Typhoons-VDV" with an updated product 32B01 began to show at the turn of the decade. Later it became clear that this was the serial appearance of the module.


Serial appearance of the product. Photo "Rosoboronexport"

BM-30-D was developed for use on various carriers, both domestic and foreign. Similar capabilities of the module are already being demonstrated, at least in the form of experimental exhibition samples.

In May last year, at the parade in Nizhny Novgorod, the KamAZ-43269 “Shot” armored car with the “Spoke” module was shown for the first time. As far as is known, at that time it was only a prototype. He was tested, and the project as a whole was preparing for mass production.

In October, the military-technical exhibition "Partner-2021" was held in Serbia. At this event, the Yugoimport company for the first time showed the Lazar III wheeled armored personnel carrier equipped with the Russian DUBM 32V01. Such armament, as reported, dramatically increases the firepower of a combat vehicle and actually transfers it from the BTR category to the BMP class.

Production and operation


Central Research Institute Burevestnik launched mass production of BM-30-D modules in 2019-20. These products were intended for installation on Typhoon-VDV armored vehicles. To date, a significant number of armored cars have been built in this configuration, and they are available in a number of units and formations of the airborne troops.

In May 2022, Burevestnik announced the launch of mass production of a new modification of 32V01 modules. Products of this series were planned to be installed on the Shot armored cars. It is curious that by that time the manufacturer not only launched work, but also managed to assemble the first batch of DBMS. A workshop was demonstrated with a large number of such products awaiting installation on armored carriers.


"Spoke" module for the "Shot" armored car - an additional grenade launcher is used. Photo by Central Research Institute "Burevestnik"

Armored vehicles "Typhoon-VDV" with the "Spice" module have been mass-produced for several years and are supplied to the airborne troops. They are actively exploited, incl. within the framework of various teachings, as well as being involved in public events.

Now it has become known about the participation of such equipment in the Special Operation for the Protection of Donbass. At the very end of September, a short video appeared showing the passage of Typhoons-Airborne Forces somewhere in the combat zone. Probably, these armored cars will have to participate in battles or provide protection for the rear.

A few days later, already in early October, information appeared about the second carrier of the "Spokes". In an unknown place on the railway, a train with military equipment was filmed, incl. with several Shot armored vehicles equipped with a new type of DBMS. This suggests that the Burevestnik Central Research Institute and related enterprises completed the assembly of at least the first batch of armored vehicles with new weapons and handed it over to the customer. Where this technique went is unknown.

Thus, the new domestic combat module has been successfully brought to mass production and operation in the army. Moreover, plans for the unification of weapons are being implemented, and the 32B01 product is already used with two wheeled platforms. It is quite possible that the project will not stop there, and other domestic or foreign armored vehicles will also receive similar DBMS.

With cannon and machine gun


The product BM-30-D / 32V01 / "Spoke" is a combat module for mounting on different chassis. The existing set of equipment and weapons allows you to monitor, search for and attack ground or air targets at ranges up to 1-2 km. Such a DBM ensures the fight against manpower, lightly armored vehicles and unfortified buildings.


"Typhoon-VDV" with module 32V01. Photo by the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation

The Spoke module itself is a tower mounted on the roof of the carrier. The main units are placed in an armored hull; under the shoulder strap is a basket with a part of the devices. The module is also equipped with an automated gunner-operator workstation. The control devices and the remote control are placed in any accessible place inside the carrier machine. The total mass of all elements of the complex (without ammunition) is up to 1,2 tons.

The basic one weapons The BM-30-D is a 30 mm 2A42 automatic cannon with 300 rounds of ammunition. A PKTM machine gun with an ammunition load of at least 1000 rounds is paired with the cannon. The tower provides circular guidance horizontally; vertical guidance - from -10 ° to + 60 °. The installation of smoke grenade launchers is envisaged. An updated version of the module for the Shot armored car is distinguished by the presence of a 30-mm AG-30 automatic grenade launcher.

On the forehead of the DUBM there is an optical-electronic station with a daylight and thermal imaging channel, as well as a laser rangefinder. The video signal and other information are displayed on the screen of the operator's workstation. The fire control system includes a ballistic computer and a two-plane stabilizer.

According to the developer organization, "Spice" allows you to deal with different targets at ranges up to 2 km. So, openly located manpower is affected at distances up to 1 km with the help of a machine gun and an automatic grenade launcher. A gun with a high-explosive fragmentation projectile can be used against tank-dangerous manpower. In this case, the range of fire reaches 2 km. At the same range, the gun, using armor-piercing ammunition, hits unprotected and lightly armored vehicles.

Modular benefits


DUBM 32V01 has a number of important features, due to which important operational capabilities are provided and high performance is achieved. In this regard, the module is of great interest to customers, and not only to the Russian army.


"Shot" with the "Spoke" module, May 9, 2021. Photo by the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation

The "Spice" project provides compatibility with different platforms. The possibility of mounting the module on three different carriers with different characteristics has already been shown, and two of them have been brought to series. It is quite possible that new projects of this kind will appear in the future. The advantages of such unification are obvious.

You should pay attention to the selected composition of weapons. Research and practice show that a cannon-machine gun complex is now needed to solve most fire tasks. Armament BM-30-D meets these requirements. The module is capable of firing and hitting all intended targets within a sufficient range. At the same time, modern LMS helps to obtain high accuracy at any time of the day.

From design to production


Thus, in just a few years, the Central Research Institute "Burevestnik" and related organizations carried out all the necessary work and received the required result. They developed a new combat module, tested it, improved its design and launched mass production. At the same time, two modifications of the DBM with different capabilities are already being produced.

A few years ago, the army began to master the BM-30-D module on Typhoon-VDV armored vehicles. Now deliveries of serial "Shots" with similar equipment begin. In addition, it is reported that such equipment is involved in the Special Operation. This means that the armed forces get the opportunity to test new equipment in different conditions and re-affirm its characteristics.
Our news channels

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

150 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +6
    4 October 2022 05: 53
    Such a module on the BMO-T will turn out to be an excellent heavy infantry fighting vehicle, and with little blood. What you need to storm cities.
    1. +7
      4 October 2022 06: 10
      Quote: Bodypuncher
      Such a module on the BMO-T and you get an excellent heavy infantry fighting vehicle

      If you put a module on BMO-T, then Baikal. Time 2A42 is irretrievably running out. What was good in 1980 is no longer relevant today in relation to the models that opponents are starting to use. Their infantry fighting vehicles / armored personnel carriers are already armored in the forehead from our 30x165. Why make a new advance weaker than the enemy?
      1. +4
        4 October 2022 06: 26
        Why make a new advance weaker than the enemy?
        Why would an infantry fighting vehicle that with the AU-220M "Baikal will carry only its automatic loader and ammunition. There are no replacements for 2A42 yet, well, you can make new ammunition for it.
      2. +5
        4 October 2022 10: 47
        Why should an automatic gun pierce heavy armored vehicles in the forehead? Is there anything else for her? In NWO, duels between light armored combat vehicles of course occur regularly, but basically 30mm works on infantry. For duels, it is easier to equip ATGM vehicles than with heavy guns! what
        1. +3
          4 October 2022 13: 37
          Quote: Eroma
          Why should an automatic gun pierce heavy armored vehicles in the forehead? Is there anything else for her?

          First, because the combat vehicle that accompanies the enemy infantry is, by definition, a very dangerous enemy for our infantry and therefore should be hit first. Secondly, the use of a programmable 57mm projectile with its much larger number of fragments will be much more effective than a 30mm projectile against uncovered and lightly covered infantry, as well as light UAVs. Thirdly, already at the stage of working out a solution for controlling a 57-mm projectile in flight. Most likely it will appear in the foreseeable future.
          1. +2
            4 October 2022 14: 47
            Quote: Hagen
            First, because the combat vehicle that accompanies the enemy infantry is, by definition, a very dangerous enemy for our infantry and therefore should be hit first.

            For this, an ATGM is needed! ATGMs can also jam oporniki good
            Quote: Hagen
            Secondly, the use of a programmable 57mm projectile with its much larger number of fragments will be much more effective than a 30mm projectile against uncovered and lightly covered infantry, as well as light UAVs.

            I can't argue here because I'm not an expert. feel but as I know, small caliber guns are more effective on single targets, such as machine gun nests, anti-tank crews, etc. due to speed. Remote detonation of larger calibers is just what is needed to more effectively hit such targets.
            Against UAVs, of course, remote detonation is what the doctor ordered drinks but there are usually no means of detecting UAVs on AFVs, only the watchful eye of the commander lol in future network-centric battles, of course, AFVs will probably have the possibility of an external control center for all sorts of flyers. wink

            But for light AFVs, the size still matters, the AU with 57mm is several times larger and heavier, which means the car must be larger and stronger, which means more expensive bully
          2. +2
            4 October 2022 15: 52
            Let's argue a little.
            The fact that time 2A42 is running out is apparently true. Even very good weapons cannot be used indefinitely. Potential opponents are switching to more armored vehicles, which 30 mm conventional BBs are no longer too tough for. Of course, you can develop an expensive BB in this caliber (tungsten, depleted uranium), but the shells will be "gold". As a result, a transition to a larger caliber suggests itself, and this is due not so much to greater armor penetration as to the realization of greater power due to a programmable fuse.
            The enemy laid these opportunities at 35-40 mm. We apparently are not able to meet 30 mm with our microelectronic base.
            The question is why exactly 57 and not 45-50? we should be able to do it there too.
            If we say that we have a lot of 57 in warehouses, then this is not about that. We are talking about completely new samples, but they are not even in the project request
            1. -2
              4 October 2022 19: 53
              LShO 57 mm. Compromised solution. However, it may well work.
              1. 0
                4 October 2022 20: 07
                Quote: garri-lin
                LShO 57 mm.

                Please translate hi
                1. +3
                  4 October 2022 20: 14
                  Grenade ballistic gun.
                  Lsho 57.
                  Light assault gun 57 mm
                  The gun itself is smaller than the one on Baikal. The return is less. The ammunition is smaller and lighter. Due to the smaller propellant charge.
                  At the same time, the projectile is quite large. There are a lot of explosives.
                  Mounted trajectory for OF. And the flat milking Loma. Yes, there is Lom.
                  The phone is ancient, it is impossible to insert links. Search on the Internet
                  Yes, and here on the site.
                  Lsho 57 or grenade ballistics gun.
                  1. +2
                    4 October 2022 20: 20
                    Thank you for the clarification.
                    But in my opinion, this is a road to nowhere. There is a line of mortars (moreover, all over the world) and it has not gone anywhere. There is a line of automatic weapons for infantry fighting vehicles. It is necessary, add AGS to the armor and calm down.
                    What is the point of fencing a garden of incomprehensible wunderwaffle station wagons? Throughout the history of artillery, attempts to cross a "snake with a hedgehog" (and they were many times) did not lead to anything good (well, except for drinking the budget laughing ) hi
                    1. +2
                      4 October 2022 21: 03
                      But what about the concept of Nona ??? Good luck? Quite.
                      LShO is not universal. But just a light gun capable of throwing a fairly large ammunition along a hinged trajectory.
                      This is exactly what is needed on the battlefield for BMP-level equipment.
                      Programmable detonation solves the problem of infantry and firing points sheltered on the ground.
                      A cumulative in this caliber can penetrate 200 300 mm
                      The scrap is also there.
                      Nothing extra and everything you need.
                      1. +1
                        4 October 2022 21: 13
                        Just one question. And where are these "Nones" now en masse? And the ersatz nons towed for the Airborne Forces? Maybe by the way there (in the Airborne Forces) they had a place due to lightness in the first place. But now comes a rethinking of the role and, accordingly, the weapons of the Airborne Forces.
                        It's certainly an interesting setup, but...
                        Separately, the mortar is much simpler, lighter and most importantly cheaper. Even self-propelled.
                        Separately, the weapon is much more powerful, long-range and already falls into the divisional level with appropriate subordination and control. hi
                      2. 0
                        4 October 2022 22: 54
                        Here it is. Divisional level. And 120 mm should be at the level of the company. Directly. Without intermediaries. Two barrels per company. And Nona is quite drawn to it. Only unify the chassis with motorized rifles. By the way, it was on the BTR80.
                      3. 0
                        4 October 2022 21: 16
                        Quote: garri-lin
                        LShO is not universal. But just a light gun capable of throwing a fairly large ammunition along a hinged trajectory.

                        Let's compare in terms of power with at least a banal 82mm mortar?
                        Who will have the advantage in power?
                        With a programmed undermining "Fringe" to help you hi
                      4. 0
                        4 October 2022 22: 55
                        Can a mortar shoot right away? With sufficient accuracy??? You are confusing artillery and BMP guns.
                      5. -1
                        4 October 2022 21: 19
                        Quote: garri-lin
                        A cumulative in this caliber can penetrate 200 300 mm

                        Any modern ATGM can do this. This monster will be an order of magnitude lighter.
                        Quote: garri-lin
                        The scrap is also there.

                        Do not laugh about the "scrap" from a short-barreled gun with a low muzzle velocity.
                      6. 0
                        4 October 2022 22: 56
                        You did not look at the gun, as I understand it.
                      7. -1
                        5 October 2022 15: 55
                        Such a long discussion that I wanted to ask a simple question. Do you have any idea what the process of preparing the same 82-mm mines for firing from the same automatic "Vasilok" looks like? At least in order to try to oppose it to LShO-57, even if there the download will also be in cassettes.
                      8. 0
                        5 October 2022 17: 27
                        Good evening. No, I don't. But in this case, I do not oppose "Cornflower" to LSO. Rather, I question the very principle of universality in artillery. Well, I’m trying to dispute the caliber 57 a little. hi
                      9. -1
                        5 October 2022 17: 39
                        Well, check it out. The process is inconvenient and not so fast. And LShO-57 was planned for ready-made shots, just shove it into cassettes and you're done.
                      10. 0
                        5 October 2022 17: 54
                        You have not heard my main message - the desire for universality in artillery gives rise to expensive, heavy and low-functional (in every narrow area that they try to combine) monsters. Which may look interesting and enticing on paper, but in the "field" they show their complete failure in front of specialized samples.
                        If it’s not difficult for you, give examples of universal systems in service in the armies of the world hi
                      11. -1
                        5 October 2022 19: 11
                        What other universal systems? What is this all about? Here, it seems, a promising 57-mm automatic low-ballistic gun was discussed.
                      12. 0
                        5 October 2022 19: 13
                        The fact that they are trying (apparently they tried, thank God) to lay the functions of a conventional BMP machine gun, anti-tank gun and mortar. The result is natural.
                  2. 0
                    5 October 2022 10: 07
                    Grenade ballistic gun.
                    Lsho 57.
                    Light assault gun 57 mm

                    we had such a gun with grenade launcher ballistics on the BMP-1, and did not show itself in any way. We do not need such a gun.
                    Nona is a cannon-howitzer-mortar, a completely different concept.
                    1. -1
                      5 October 2022 12: 41
                      Are you talking about 73 mm? Well, don't be ridiculous. This concept is no good at all. It's completely different here.
                      1. 0
                        6 October 2022 09: 29
                        The LSHO for which you are campaigning has a different name AGS-57. That is, the same AGS of the "Flame" type, only with a larger caliber. Grenade launcher, automatic. The BMP-1 has a 73 mm Grom cannon, this is an SPG-9 grenade launcher. One family is grenade launchers.
                        Why is one grenade launcher better than another? Rhetorical question.
                        Therefore, LShO-57 did not go further than military tests.
                      2. 0
                        6 October 2022 09: 35
                        Huge difference in ballistics.
                        Spg 9 and its analogues and derivatives and all RPGs starting from RPG2 are essentially rocket-propelled grenades. Direct shot. Flat trajectory.
                        And in the context of the LShO, grenade launcher ballistics was meant just from the AGS. Tobish trajectory hinged.
                        Essentially a mortar. In this case, the shot comes to the target at a large angle, almost vertically, and this allows the patient to fully realize both the high-explosive and fragmentation effects of the ammunition.
                        The difference is just huge. Learn the mat part.
                      3. 0
                        6 October 2022 10: 53
                        Everyone understands the difference. Explain why one difference is better than another.
                        Is a mortar trajectory better than a flat one? How?
                        Why should guns with a flat trajectory be replaced with a mortar one?
                      4. 0
                        6 October 2022 12: 58
                        Come serve. And the difference will immediately become clear.
                        Mounted fire allows you to hit dispersed and sheltered infantry on the ground. The flat one cannot do this.
                      5. -2
                        7 October 2022 08: 30
                        Come serve. And the difference will immediately become clear.

                        wassat a solid argument. Apparently, they did not serve in the army and do not put this reAGS into service.
                        Mounted fire allows you to hit dispersed and sheltered infantry on the ground. The flat one cannot do this.

                        Read the combat regulations. Infantry goes into battle from a distance of 400 meters on foot, in vehicles from 800-1000 m. How to hit targets in line of sight at this distance? Overhead fire? Of course not. Only flat fire, and preferably a direct shot.
                        But to defeat hiding targets, they put an AGS on the equipment, and support their advancing or defending infantry with mortars and other means.
                        Now, if the tactics of actions change, then we can say that in order to ensure actions "in a different way", we need different equipment and weapons.
                      6. 0
                        7 October 2022 08: 42
                        Read the combat manuals.

                        And where does it say that it is impossible to use mortar fire on an advancing enemy, or are you confusing the movie "Two Soldiers" with a combat charter? The most effective way to stop an attack is to use mortars, not machine guns, which are carried out by snipers once or twice.
                      7. 0
                        10 October 2022 12: 34
                        it is not written there that mortars cannot be used. It is more difficult to hit a moving target with a mortar, for example, an infantry fighting vehicle. Therefore, guns, not mortars, are on combat vehicles.
                      8. 0
                        8 October 2022 19: 48
                        Artillery barrage??? Not? Did not hear???? Well, at least revisit old movies. It's well shown there.
                      9. -1
                        10 October 2022 12: 35
                        shoot from military vehicles with barrage fire too?
                      10. 0
                        10 October 2022 19: 10
                        What's the difference. The main thing is to hit the target. And how is there a difference?
                      11. 0
                        11 October 2022 09: 08
                        The main thing is to hit the target. And how is there a difference?

                        the difference in shooting flat and mounted trajectory is significant. You yourself wrote about this. Guns are installed on the equipment for firing with a flat trajectory, and preferably with a direct shot, which greatly simplifies aiming and increases the likelihood of hitting a target, especially a small and mobile one.
                        A hinged trajectory can be fired from a closed position, at a covered enemy, but to hit, you need to adjust the fire, or conduct it at previously reconnoitered targets, according to pre-designated landmarks. Or it is possible to shoot a direct fire with a hinged trajectory, as they shoot from mortars at advancing infantry.
                        But any of these options is worse in efficiency compared to a direct fire gun mounted on a combat vehicle.
                      12. 0
                        11 October 2022 16: 12
                        You have Pecheneg. I have an AGS 30 flame.
                        Goal: line of sight machine gun point. Distance 1000 meters.
                        Trench cover type.
                        How fast can you hit a machine gunner?
                      13. 0
                        12 October 2022 08: 33
                        The example is not correct. You can hit from the first stage, or you can shoot all day to no avail. What does it have to do with a machine gun, what with an AGS.
                        But in the presence of an infantry fighting vehicle with a 30 mm cannon, your target will live no more than 5 minutes. with AGS without adjustment, you will never throw into a trench.
                      14. 0
                        12 October 2022 17: 30
                        Tobish that you can’t shoot from the AGS within sight, you don’t know. Without correction from the side? Shot short with the first tape. The second showered.
                        A target that does not have a pronounced "height" is easier to hit with flat fire. Modern SLAs allow hitting point targets on the go or from short stops.
                        Read how Drok works.
                      15. 0
                        13 October 2022 08: 39
                        I would like to see how you really, at a distance of 1000 meters, find a machine gun nest and hit it. Theory and practice are somewhat different things.
                        I will not go into details on each example. I will only tell you that a flat shot, especially a direct one, hits the enemy much faster and more accurately. The hinged trajectory does not allow hitting targets with the same efficiency. For example, at a distance of 2 km, a 30 mm cannon projectile flies for 2 seconds, and an 82 mm mine for 10 seconds. Accordingly, hitting a moving target is 5 times more difficult.
                        Therefore, guns are on combat vehicles, and not LShO.
                      16. 0
                        13 October 2022 13: 49
                        Exactly. At 1000 meters for a direct shot, you need to accurately hit the figure 50 by 60 cm. This is for a machine gunner. And how to do this if you know where it is with an accuracy of plus or minus 2-3 meters.
                        And a few grenades thrown by a canopy are guaranteed to hit it. Since an exact hit is not needed.
                        Mina flies for a long time. The LSO shot will fly less. Not 2 seconds of course, but not 10 either.
                      17. 0
                        14 October 2022 08: 28
                        you are again moving on to particulars. A machine-gun nest is not a fact that will be located openly, even in a trench. Look at the machine-gun nests in the Donbass: concrete structures or with a log ceiling. Fragmentation shots are effective against openly located infantry. Nobody argues here. For this, a motorized rifle company has AGS and mortars. combat vehicles: lightly armored vehicles and cars, firing points, an advancing enemy, fire support. It is more convenient to shoot at all these targets flatly, and preferably with a direct shot. This is written in instructions and regulations, and confirmed by practice.
                        That's when you prove that it is more efficient to hit equipment maneuvering on the battlefield and infantry sheltered in engineering structures from the AGS, then they will consider the possibility of installing LSO on vehicles
                      18. 0
                        14 October 2022 09: 51
                        I always spoke only about unequipped firing points.
                        It makes almost no sense to work out of 30 mi on equipped firing points. There will be as much use as from an AGS of any caliber. But the answer on the armor will fly almost for sure.
                        For a concrete structure, only a tank or BMP3 100 mm.
                      19. 0
                        14 October 2022 10: 20
                        just 30 mm has proven itself very well when working on firing points. Breaks through concrete slabs, and flat fire allows you to get into the loopholes.
                      20. 0
                        14 October 2022 11: 43
                        Breaks through concrete slabs of what thickness? From what distance can you confidently hit the embrasures ??
                      21. 0
                        17 October 2022 09: 32
                        at 1000 meters projectile deflection up to 500 mm.
                        Concrete slabs pierce standard, offs, and explode inside. There were developments of a feathered sub-caliber projectile, it had penetration up to 100 mm. But I don’t know if they went into series or not. .
                      22. 0
                        17 October 2022 10: 22
                        OFS explodes almost instantly. What can he pierce. BBhi both do not have a charge. They will try to break through. It cannot be cut with concrete crumbling. Armor and helmet will be scratched.
                        At 0F, by the way, the charge is at the level of 10 grams. If we are talking about a properly prepared shelter with earth filling on the outside and bags of soil on the inside as a lining, then the effectiveness is meager. Need a larger caliber.
                      23. 0
                        9 December 2022 05: 22
                        Yeah. And on the left, behind me, I have a spear or a couple of trays, it turns out that I covered them. And how will the calculation of LNG or trays look at my offender?
                      24. -1
                        9 December 2022 08: 07
                        A spear will not do anything to a correctly positioned AGS. And if he tries, then with a competent observer, he will also grab a couple of boxes.
                        Tray is power. at these distances. And so when they "talk" it will fly over them. From your trays. Or from the sled.
                      25. 0
                        9 December 2022 05: 25
                        Not the correct question. And who will win, a company of Special Forces or 30000 Spartans ???
                      26. -1
                        9 December 2022 08: 09
                        Correctly. A good example of the difference between a direct shot and a flat one.
                      27. -1
                        6 October 2022 13: 08
                        Why should guns with a flat trajectory be replaced with a mortar one?

                        In order not to be like "three poplars on Plyushchikha". For such armored vehicles, it is better to use AGS, only a lower car is needed, and not a three-meter height. AGS and flat low ballistics and hinged trajectory allows. And with this cannon it’s good to shoot at targets in the shooting range.
            2. 0
              21 October 2022 15: 15
              I agree. After a 30mm combat module with an ammunition load of 300 pieces and a weight of 1,2 tons, it is somehow illogical to switch to a 57 mm combat module with an ammunition load of 80 pieces and weighing 3,9 tons. But on wheeled or floating equipment it is impossible. Begs bm ~ 40mm with bq ~ 200pcs and remote detonation
      3. 0
        4 October 2022 11: 49
        Baikal is at the testing stage and it is not known when it will be born, but there is a Spoke, bk to it, and we have our own / war for a second
    2. +6
      4 October 2022 08: 18
      Quote: Bodypuncher
      Such a module on the BMO-T will turn out to be an excellent heavy infantry fighting vehicle, and with little blood. What you need to storm cities.

      BMO-T with BM-Boomerang is preferable, already built-in ATGMs, an angle of +74 degrees and more ammunition, but you need to mount the AGS.
      Looks very natural in photoshop.



      You can also recall the BTR-T project based on the T-55 crew 2 + 5, the same 2A42. Uninhabited BMs will also organically get up there.

      1. 0
        15 October 2022 05: 06
        A good car but loses in mobility to wheeled BMs.
        Now, in order to drive dill carts, wheeled BMs are needed.
        And why did the BMPT not please you?
        The BMPT and armor also have a developed complex of fire impact.
    3. +4
      4 October 2022 08: 21
      With UVN +60 and other disadvantages?? Do not make me laugh. The main caliber for MCIs, yes, but no more.
  2. Eug
    +1
    4 October 2022 06: 14
    I wonder if it makes sense to create a similar module for 57 mm - LSO or with normal ballistics? And what is the negative aiming angle of the gun? In general, the unification of modules is a great idea. As for me, ideally, military equipment in general should be made up of unified "cubes" - modules - platforms with minimal refinement "in place". . About 20 years ago, I talked with a person who was involved in the development of BM at Morozov’s KMDB, he, in response to my joking remark that their module looks like a bulky box placed on a platform (can be seen on the BTR-4), answered without a shadow of humor that this is to provide negative pickup angles. And here the module is quite small in height.
    1. 0
      4 October 2022 07: 24
      People have forgotten how to read. It says "vertical guidance - from -10 ° to + 60 °" ...
    2. +2
      4 October 2022 08: 16
      Quote: Eug
      I wonder if it makes sense to create a similar module for 57 mm - LSO or with normal ballistics?

      The volume of ammunition - 50 shells? And then? Show the figs from the hatch to the enemy?
      1. +1
        4 October 2022 13: 31
        Quote: Eug
        I wonder if it makes sense to create a similar module for 57 mm - LSO or with normal ballistics?
        There is already a BM with a 57mm gun. AU220M "Baikal" is called. And in different versions. It was tested both on the chassis of the BMP-3 ("Derivation-Air Defense") and on the chassis of the T-15.

  3. +1
    4 October 2022 06: 25
    And the first thing they did during the modernization was the installation of the AGS.

    This is to the question of the indispensability of 30mm guns on armored vehicles. The MO kicked off the LSO, and then fastens the AGS to each combat module.
    1. +5
      4 October 2022 08: 27
      This happens when the "point of view" is far from reality.
      For light equipment, it is high time to make a unified module with AGS 40 Balkans and PKT. Well, to the first range of ammunition with a cumulative including. Enough for light targets with anti-fragmentation armor. And you don't need more.
      Competently sheltered infantry can be suppressed with a high ballistics cannon, but it can be destroyed from the AGS. Everyone seems to know this. But knowledge is not used.
      1. 0
        4 October 2022 09: 45
        Still, the combination of 40mm Balkan and PKT is more suitable for very light vehicles like the Tiger or where a heavier module will lead to loss of buoyancy. And a completely uninhabited module for light vehicles is a dubious solution, you need a hatch in the middle, and the ammunition is already around the hatch.
        1. +2
          4 October 2022 10: 16
          The trouble is that all these Typhoons and analogues are essentially ersatz armored personnel carriers. Only the price is higher and the patency is in question. Tiger DUM with stabilization is frankly redundant. PKT with a thermal imaging sight and a bracket for a conventional infantry RPG such as Mukha or Shmel. More is not needed. And to work quietly without power supply.
          But on heavier equipment, you can do what I described.
          1. +1
            4 October 2022 10: 36
            MCIs are cheaper than armored personnel carriers, all the more cheaper than armored personnel carriers such vehicles as the Shot and Tiger. The armored personnel carrier has a complex transmission, and the chassis of the armored personnel carrier cannot be cheaper.
            And stabilization is not always needed, but an electric drive is needed, for which it is possible to install an additional engine with a generator.
            1. +2
              4 October 2022 11: 00
              The two-axle chassis of the Typhoon is much more complicated and more expensive than the four-axle chassis of the armored personnel carrier 82. Due to hydropneumatic systems and other stuffing. At the same time, parity in weight. In terms of protection, Typhoon seems to be a little ahead. The armor is new, more expensive. And the booked volume is less.
              In the Tiger additional generator ??? Where? There is no place there.
              1. -1
                4 October 2022 11: 11
                There is always a place for an additional generator, its dimensions depend on the power.
                1. +1
                  4 October 2022 11: 37
                  Well, let's say there will be something measuring 30 by 20 by 50 cm. Plus a tank of 10 liters. Fuel in the fighting compartment? No, just outside.
                  In large machines such as Typhoon, this is still possible. But not in the Tiger.
                  1. +2
                    4 October 2022 11: 51
                    on wheeled vehicles, it is enough to have a battery, since, unlike tracked vehicles, the engine resource is many times greater
                    1. +1
                      4 October 2022 12: 32
                      That's what they do. Larger battery.
                  2. 0
                    9 December 2022 05: 33
                    Tell me, what doesn’t it allow you to simply power the generator from the fuel tank? Is it necessary to collective farm 10 liters of solarium on the outside of the machine?
                    1. -1
                      9 December 2022 08: 16
                      Where are the fuel tanks on the cars??? And where can a generator be installed in the armored cabin of the same tiger ???? How to organize fuel supply??? Put an additional fuel pump to supply fuel to the generator???? How reliable will it be if the car is damaged ???
                      It will be bullshit. Therefore, there is no point. Batteries are both smaller and more reliable.
              2. +2
                4 October 2022 11: 26
                Quote: garri-lin
                In the Tiger additional generator ??? Where? There is no place there.

                I do not know what the power consumption of electronics such as an optoelectronic station with a daylight and thermal imaging channel, as well as with a laser rangefinder, but I think that two kW can be met. And this is a box of about 500/300/200 mm., Together with a tank and a weight of 15 kg. It seems to me that this is quite a feasible task for designers, where to place it.
                1. 0
                  4 October 2022 11: 40
                  O answered above and coincided with your opinion. There is another meaning here too. An immobilized MCI with armor from 7,62 × 54 with a stalled engine can still be any kind of shelter and a working DUM may be needed.
                  Techniques such as the Tiger should be abandoned immediately after being dedained. And DUM is simply not needed there. Ridge.
                  1. -1
                    4 October 2022 12: 00
                    There is a video from the war zone, where just our "Tiger" is ambushed and the machine gunner continuously fires reloading the tape. And since there are no armor plates, the machine gunner still gets injured. It never occurred to the machine gunner to leave the car after the stop. It must be different. Observation should be carried out from an open hatch, and after the start of fire contact, the machine gunner should be able to go down under the armor, albeit weak, and continue firing using the electric drive of the machine gun installation.
                    1. +1
                      4 October 2022 12: 30
                      For that matter, a periscope sight and wings for remote control are enough. Right left up down. 19th century level. Tracers in the tape and there are no problems.
                      1. +1
                        4 October 2022 15: 06
                        the idea is good, the main thing is to do it, while the MO with quick conclusions and decisions is very difficult
                      2. +1
                        4 October 2022 18: 42
                        The simpler the design, the smaller the order and the less sawdust. Alas.
                      3. 0
                        5 October 2022 14: 35
                        this is in peacetime, but in wartime you need to use ingenuity, and it’s high time to shake up this swamp
                      4. 0
                        6 October 2022 13: 16
                        The simpler the design, the smaller the order and the less sawdust. Alas.

                        It seems that now the designers are competing who will make it harder and more expensive. Of course, not designers, but their owners. Vtyuhat armies more expensive.
                      5. 0
                        6 October 2022 13: 20
                        These are the realities of life. Only recently, I remember only one case when the MO said loudly: what the hell are you proposing. And that is conditional.
    2. -1
      4 October 2022 11: 50
      discarded due to non-standard BC
      1. +1
        4 October 2022 12: 09
        The problem is that the 82-mm Cornflower was also abandoned. At the lower level, they were left without effective means of automatic firing in medium calibers.
        1. +1
          4 October 2022 12: 51
          the difference is that Vasilek is considered a stationary weapon, and it seems to be there, it’s just that it’s not enough, but the LShO-atypical machine of its shells is produced at best for testing, it’s not suitable for SVO
  4. 0
    4 October 2022 08: 00
    Will they buy 30 pieces for parades again? Plywood marshal yo mayo.
    1. -1
      4 October 2022 08: 43
      This technique is already in the NWO zone. Most likely people are ready to use it
  5. +1
    4 October 2022 08: 42
    I saw a video with a train of this equipment heading towards Ukraine. I hope some insiders are true and something will happen soon.
    1. +1
      4 October 2022 13: 36
      I live on the border and see our equipment. Sadly, we are only approaching the level of the enemy of the 2000s. Even these modules are very rare. will be comprehensive
  6. +3
    4 October 2022 08: 47
    These modules must be delivered to the troops in full, yesterday.
  7. +1
    4 October 2022 08: 57
    These combat modules are in demand on light carriers, such as Typhoon-VDV and Shot, and this is the right decision, heavier platforms (infantry fighting vehicles, armored personnel carriers), of course, must be equipped with Baikal-type modules.
    1. 0
      4 October 2022 13: 38
      I do not agree, if you expand the line, then these modules can be installed on tanks and other equipment, including civilian ones.
  8. The comment was deleted.
    1. +3
      4 October 2022 10: 18
      Oh couch expert. On a target that does not have a pronounced "height", a flat fire is generally ineffective.
      1. +1
        4 October 2022 10: 51
        Such an opinion has the right to life, no doubt. The automatic grenade launcher is very well suited for suppressing detected firing points like recoilless rifles and machine gun positions. But such a module is supposed to be installed on vehicles of the "Shot" and "Typhoon-VDV" type, they are more for the functions of escort or firing from shelters and ambushes. Border guards, missilemen and gunners are very well suited. Against sheltered infantry, more serious vehicles with a larger caliber and preferably with remote detonation shells are needed.
        1. +1
          4 October 2022 11: 04
          Well, there is no need to modernize "Pug" to a state where she can really fight the Elephant. It is necessary to adequately select the tool for existing tasks.
          By the way, 40 mm shots from a grenade launcher, which, when hit, bounce before the explosion work very well on lying infantry.
        2. +2
          4 October 2022 13: 05
          In some neighboring state), about 5 years ago, they actively worked in this direction, in a smaller caliber, GSh-23.
          In the end, they quit.
          When fired, the wheeled chassis sags, even single, while the projectile is still in the barrel.
          3-4 queue - dispersion is unacceptable.
          Such impression, we step on someone's rake. Well, or belatedly gaining experience.
        3. -1
          6 October 2022 13: 36
          Against sheltered infantry, more serious vehicles with a larger caliber and preferably with remote detonation shells are needed.

          What is covered? If covered, then shells with detonation will not help. Moreover, stationary defense is carried out by classic shelling.
          1. 0
            6 October 2022 13: 40
            Sheltered behind the parapet, in trenches and dugouts. Usually this is how the infantry takes cover. And shells with remote detonation really help in such situations.
            1. -1
              6 October 2022 13: 51
              Sheltered behind the parapet, in trenches and dugouts. Usually this is how the infantry takes cover. And shells with remote detonation really help in such situations.

              Too expensive. It’s easier to throw a grenade into the trench from the AGS. And in dugouts, an explosion in the air will not cause any harm to the dugout.
  9. -5
    4 October 2022 09: 02
    Placing this module on the chassis shown is a Typhoon crime.
    The high placement of the BM, coupled with a large muzzle energy, will lead to the swaying of the vehicle and a drop in shooting accuracy, and nothing was said about the stabilizer, which means shooting is impossible right away.
    1. +4
      4 October 2022 09: 20
      Did you read the article? Two-plane stabilizer + ballistic computer + laser rangefinder.
      1. -5
        4 October 2022 10: 19
        A lot of things are also written on the fence. There is no information on this subject on the manufacturer’s website. In addition, the design of the tower is embarrassing - a large number of hatches, overlays on self-tapping screws, panels on bolts. All this will fly apart when hit by the most ordinary bullet. access to the units through the roof?
        1. 0
          4 October 2022 10: 39
          Hatches for repair, maintenance and charging. The manufacturer forgot to consult you regarding the design laughing . Hope your comments are taken into account. wassat .
        2. +1
          4 October 2022 10: 40
          From the manufacturer's website:
          "Improved performance through:
          - division of the module into functionally complete units;
          - high maintainability due to good access to all components and assemblies;
          - remote diagnostics of the state and search for failed equipment.
          Apparently, there are more advantages from ease of access.
          And there are also hatches in the roof. Reservation is from bullets and fragments, and a 30mm projectile (and perhaps 12.7-14.5) will not only destroy hatches there.
          1. -3
            4 October 2022 11: 33
            The Germans and the French, too, on the BTT were fond of hatches for - "high maintainability due to good access to all components and assemblies" - stupid degenerates always have a false concern for soldiers and officers.
            It all ended with welded hulls without any hatches and welded or cast towers, where even sights were placed on the roof.
            It didn’t occur to you that the failure of a BM in battle, from an ordinary fragment of an 82-mm mine and a 7,62 mm bullet, would lead to the death of people and the destruction of equipment.
            Here is a BM in good resolution - armored self-tapping screws are available ... http://www.burevestnik.com/products/30mm.html
            1. -1
              4 October 2022 12: 23
              The module, in fact, is uninhabited, if it is made completely welded or cast, there will be no access to its contents at all, from the word at all. At least a little spatial imagination and engineering thinking will definitely not interfere in this case.
              1. +1
                4 October 2022 14: 08
                Quote: Vladimir Michailovich
                It didn’t occur to you that the failure of a BM in battle, from an ordinary fragment of an 82-mm mine and a 7,62 mm bullet, would lead to the death of people and the destruction of equipment.
                The article gives the weight of the module - 1,2 tons (without ammunition). Because of this, the center of gravity is already so high, and you propose to strengthen the protection, that is, add more weight.
                In order to cover the weapon with additional protection, it is necessary to make the visible part of the BM smaller in size, and this is possible if part of the module equipment is hidden inside the vehicle. That is, we will come to where we started: less space inside the car and ammunition next to the crew.
      2. 0
        6 October 2022 13: 37
        Did you read the article? Two-plane stabilizer + ballistic computer + laser rangefinder.

        Therefore, it stands like a moon rover. Already lured by these modules.
  10. 0
    4 October 2022 10: 43
    Add an ATGM installation and here is a single module for installation on the BMP-1 during modernization
    1. 0
      4 October 2022 11: 47
      That's all right, but the main problem of the BMP remains the monitoring of threats in a combat situation and the immediate opening of fire on detected targets. The problem of a narrow viewing angle for the gunner-operator, and reloading the 73-mm cannon, is replaced by the inconvenience of handling an uninhabited module and the same low awareness.
      On the BMP-1, first of all, you should attend to the installation of an additional machine gun on the commander's hatch, modeled on the machine gun mount on the BTR-MDM "Rakushka". Then the commander, and possibly the driver, will have the opportunity to independently fire when targets are detected, regardless of the employment and distraction of the gunner-operator. Based on such considerations, the cannon module should have been placed higher so that the machine gun on the commander's hatch would pass in size and the cannon would not touch it. Then the disadvantages of the BMP-1 layout will turn into its advantages, since the machine gun on the commander's hatch will be even more effective than a pair of course machine guns like on the BMP-3.
      1. +1
        4 October 2022 14: 18
        Quote: Sergey Alexandrovich
        the main problem of the BMP remains the monitoring of threats in a combat situation
        To do this, the commander must have the means for a circular view. Moreover, it is necessary with a thermal channel, which increases the chance of detecting an enemy in poor visibility (dark, dust, fog). On some BMs they put a panorama (“Baikal”), but the price of this issue greatly harms the introduction into the troops.
    2. +1
      4 October 2022 11: 55
      I agree, but the reality is harsh - no one will install such modules on the BMP-1 under current conditions, 90% will come with standard weapons, another 10% will receive a turret from the BTR-82A is possible, but in the future for the modernization of the BTR-82A - the most to-module with ATGM cornet / bassoon will allow you to effectively deal with the enemy
  11. 0
    4 October 2022 10: 46
    Well, what about the knitting needle? You can just thump. fellow
  12. -1
    4 October 2022 11: 27
    Quote: Sergey Alexandrovich
    Hatches for repair, maintenance and charging

    There will be nothing to repair after being hit by a bullet from small arms ...
    1. +1
      4 October 2022 11: 44
      There will be nothing from the shooter.
      BRDM 2 behind two hatches close the tanks that are above the rear wheels. A square of armored steel 40, probably by 40 cm. Hinges and bolts. VOG is kept from the grenade launcher.
  13. -3
    4 October 2022 11: 40
    Quote: garri-lin
    Oh couch expert. On a target that does not have a pronounced "height", a flat fire is generally ineffective.

    I wrote to you about aimed fire, what does it mean that it does not have a pronounced height, what is it? Straight bright? I had to shoot from 2A42 and 2A28 and I know what I am writing. I wish you also get the opportunity to compare in practice - innovators will take care of this ...
    1. -1
      4 October 2022 12: 39
      A grenade launcher in a properly equipped position is essentially a target 50 wide. 50 high. At a distance, well, let's say 300 meters. And you need to get right into it. Not near, not in front, but in it. And do not talk about the fragmentation action of 30 mm shells. There is a minuscule. The equipment with which the fire is fired moves at a speed of 30 km per hour. Heading angle to the target 45 degrees. How much will it take to defeat time ???
      1. 0
        4 October 2022 13: 15
        Finish the rubbish already, drag it to the forum. You, like moving armor, will shoot from your whistle - the distance is -800 meters, the speed is 50 km / h, your actions, do not answer, the question is rhetorical.
        1. 0
          4 October 2022 14: 23
          Now it's clear where you fired from 30 mm guns. Hello clanmates.
    2. -1
      4 October 2022 12: 41
      And how long will it take for the AGS to shower that square with VOGs with air blast and GGE ???
      Sights are modern by default. With ballistic computers and range finder.
  14. -2
    4 October 2022 11: 42
    At this event, the Yugoimport company for the first time showed the Lazar III wheeled armored personnel carrier equipped with the Russian DUBM 32V01. Such armament, as reported, dramatically increases the firepower of a combat vehicle and actually transfers it from the BTR category to the BMP class.


    It is not the armament that translates into the "BMP class", but the security of the crew and troops.
    The fact that the BMP-1 and BMP-2 are so called does not make them full-fledged "infantry fighting vehicles", in fact they are tracked armored personnel carriers (like the M113, for example).
  15. +3
    4 October 2022 11: 50
    Hmmm .... and there exactly 2A42? And not 2A72? what
    It’s just that at one time 2A42 with its recoil could not even be put on an armored personnel carrier (I had to arm the BTR-82A 2A72). And the truss around the barrel is more suitable for the 2A72, with its well-known problem with accuracy without a front barrel support point.
    1. -1
      4 October 2022 19: 47
      Actually, the shape of the muzzle brake makes it possible to identify the gun unequivocally, it is 2A42. They could install recoil devices, but not a fact.
  16. -2
    4 October 2022 12: 09
    Quote: garri-lin
    BRDM 2 behind two hatches cover the tanks

    You are definitely hopeless.
    1. -1
      4 October 2022 12: 42
      Studio denial. Preferably backed up by something.
  17. 0
    4 October 2022 13: 24
    Quote: Sergey Alexandrovich
    That's all right, but the main problem of the BMP remains the monitoring of threats in a combat situation and the immediate opening of fire on detected targets.

    Absolutely correct statement.
  18. +1
    4 October 2022 14: 04
    Quote: Sergey Alexandrovich
    There is a video from the war zone, where just our "Tiger" is ambushed and the machine gunner continuously fires reloading the tape. And since there are no armor plates, the machine gunner still gets injured. It never occurred to the machine gunner to leave the car after the stop. It must be different. Observation must be carried out from an open hatch ...

    I agree with you, only the shooter should be in a protected turret, which will reduce the likelihood of injury. Unfortunately, most "Tigers" and "Typhoons" do not have protected turrets. Although one instance was somehow caught on the video from the SVO, it was just not clear whether this was an industrially manufactured turret, or the work of army craftsmen. sad
    1. +1
      4 October 2022 14: 40
      Quote: Radikal
      Unfortunately, most "Tigers" and "Typhoons" do not have protected turrets.
      Since 2016, armored vehicles with BM "Arbalet-DM" have been purchased for the troops. They are with stabilizers and are controlled from inside the car:
      But in Ukraine, if there are such machines, then in small quantities (not seen on TV)
  19. -2
    4 October 2022 14: 16
    Quote: Sergey Alexandrovich
    The module, in fact, is uninhabited, if it is made completely welded or cast, there will be no access to its contents at all, from the word at all.

    Where did I say that access to the inside of the module is not needed - a sofa constructor? Who prevents you from making a folding roof and a folding rear part? - I will answer for you - lack of a brain ...
    1. -1
      4 October 2022 19: 43
      For the very smart, I want to note that access is needed not only from below and above, but also from the side.
  20. -1
    4 October 2022 14: 19
    Quote: KVIRTU
    When fired, the wheeled chassis sags, even single, while the projectile is still in the barrel.

    The only sensible comment.
  21. +2
    4 October 2022 14: 53
    Quote: Bad_gr
    Quote: Radikal
    Unfortunately, most "Tigers" and "Typhoons" do not have protected turrets.
    Since 2016, armored vehicles with BM "Arbalet-DM" have been purchased for the troops. They are with stabilizers and are controlled from inside the car:
    But in Ukraine, if there are such machines, then in small quantities (not seen on TV)

    This mod for combat modules can play a cruel joke, since the field of view of this module is smaller than the field of view of the eye of a fighter in a protected turret. That is, the ability to detect potential danger using the module is lower than the presence of a fighter at the top. To the question, what about at night, I will answer - either a compact helmet-mounted device, or a separate compact module on the turret. In general, our opponents, on almost no samples of MCIs, have DUMs - mostly protected turrets. I hope you do not consider them idiots, especially given their pragmatism? After all, every wounded or killed soldier is entitled to a solid insurance payment. Something like that. sad
    1. +1
      4 October 2022 20: 21
      An inhabited BM (turret) is more reliable in terms of survivability and troubleshooting, which happens quite often, and the electric trigger and guidance mechanisms may fail.
  22. 0
    4 October 2022 15: 25
    Quote: garri-lin
    Now it's clear where you fired from 30 mm guns. Hello clanmates.
    Before, of course, idiots were not called up, but I would like to make an exception for you :) There you can substantively prove your views :).
    1. 0
      4 October 2022 20: 07
      Well, you personally know that idiots are not called upon.
      By the way, do you know that in the days of Peter the Great, guys who were unfit for service in the Army were called "Scoundrels".
  23. +1
    4 October 2022 15: 27
    The main weapon of the BM-30-D is a 30 mm 2A42 automatic cannon with 300 rounds of ammunition. A PKTM machine gun with an ammunition load of at least 1000 rounds is paired with the cannon.

    Again, weapons from guys in slippers with RPGs, at best, on pickup trucks. There are probably "anti-drone" capabilities - but as far as the SLA will allow ...

    ATGM can not be "fastened"? What to do if an enemy tank meets?
    1. -1
      4 October 2022 20: 08
      To whom? Armored car?
      Although you are right. A pair of Hermes wouldn't hurt
  24. -2
    4 October 2022 16: 19
    An excellent module for armored vehicles, the developers did a great job if they launched it into a series, apparently it enjoys the trust of the military. For me, it is very convenient to use: against mobile groups of the Armed Forces of Ukraine on pickups infiltrating to the rear, for reconnaissance, and guarding marching columns, and possibly in settlements. I ask critics to pay attention that this is not an infantry fighting vehicle module, but an armored car module that has other tasks, including ammunition, since the module is remote, due to which the operator does not have to stick around to the waist like a Rambo. And if you compare it with the Kurganets armored personnel carrier module, where there is just 1 large-caliber Soviet machine gun Utes, it becomes really clear who worked more productively. A low bow to all those involved in the creation of the SPOKES
    1. +1
      7 October 2022 09: 14
      So it is, the module for the future, under the Zubr-11 armor-piercing projectile, will come in handy if the enemy in Ukraine has heavy Western-made infantry fighting vehicles.
  25. +2
    4 October 2022 19: 54
    You don't need to invent anything. All the same, the Western military-industrial complex cannot be surpassed. Beat the enemy with his own weapon... study the captured NATO equipment and launch the production of copies. So it will be possible to gain time and avoid plundering and waste of funds.
    Remember the history of the appearance of the T-34 tank.
  26. +2
    4 October 2022 20: 16
    Quote: garri-lin
    Well, you personally know that idiots are not called upon.

    Of course, I was called up and I served :) Just on the BMP-1 and BMP-2, so I had to shoot :) so when some kind of couch oaf drowns for short-barreled whistles, it becomes scary for those people who will go into battle against them .A-BMP-1s are already going into battle, but unfortunately there are no children of these innovators behind the levers and sights, who sawed a lot of money instead of producing the BMP-3 and BTR-90.
    1. 0
      10 October 2022 03: 37
      Well, the BTR 90 is really a pity, a cool car, very cool for its time. And BMP-3s are produced, even modernized ones.
      At the expense of the BMP-1, I agree they should have been sold for a long time either at a cheap price in bulk, or if they weren’t liquid at all, they should be donated to countries of the 4th-5th world. Free of charge, that is, for nothing, well, or exchange for bananas there. But it’s better if there is an opportunity to sell in bulk ... It’s not scary to buy bmd-4 and bmp-3 with the proceeds, even if 100-200 pieces are priced like 1 new one.
      And the BMP-2 will still serve, especially if they are upgraded ...
  27. +1
    4 October 2022 20: 23
    Quote: Sergey Alexandrovich
    For the very smart, I want to note that access is needed not only from below and above, but also from the side.

    Who needs it? If only your panama.
  28. +1
    4 October 2022 20: 39
    Basically, it's all yesterday...
    it should have been in the troops for a long time, in the same 2016 ...
    but as usual, "there is no money" and the army, as a customer, is insolvent ...
    perhaps it can handle the Western junk of the "80s" that are being driven to the Zhidobanders, but it should have been there in droves since March ...
    in short, they again slip us "moldy cheese" for fresh ...
    there is a module with a 57mm cannon, which is still relevant now, but there is not a single armored car with it ...
    something was like a "boomerang" wheeled, but no one saw it beyond the SUV for parades ...
    1. 0
      10 October 2022 03: 32
      57 will not be put on light wheeled vehicles. A gun with a total energy of 57 mm will not even be on an infantry fighting vehicle. This will either be a military air defense vehicle, or perhaps they will put it on promising infantry fighting vehicles, although again it’s unlikely, under 57 mm you need a hefty perfect suo, it’s very expensive to put it on a front-line vehicle ... And without a super smart suo, it’s faster-firing and with more BC 30mm gun is more interesting.
      1. -1
        10 October 2022 18: 04
        with a larger BC 30mm gun is more interesting

        There is no sense from it either now or in the future ...
        pi ndo soviet infantry fighting vehicles already with armor from 30mm
        they have a large BC for 1 sput, and not like ours for 250 ...
        so you need to wet them the first time exactly 57mm with a range of up to 12km
  29. -1
    6 October 2022 08: 15
    For such machines, 2a42 is redundant, in such cases the Americans have a 30mm cannon (made from 20mm) with a short sleeve. They put on Apache and light armored vehicles .... We don’t have such a model and sculpt what we have. Or, you need to put a 40mm grenade launcher and make an assortment of grenades (of, cumulative). But it is not serial either.
    1. 0
      10 October 2022 03: 25
      Well, a gun with a short sleeve is not needed for sure, but pairing with an AGS gun that is 30 or 40 mm is very good, the same Americans practice a lot. At the same time, the recoil of the AGS is ridiculous, you can safely put it on the side of the gun and nothing will happen.
  30. 0
    10 October 2022 03: 22
    Everything is fine, but I have a question why they don’t ask for a gun with AGS, it doesn’t give much weight and recoil, while efficiency, including for ATGM operators, increases, and AGS can also allow you to work from closed positions. The thing is simple, but very effective.

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

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