Self-propelled anti-tank gun 2S25M "Octopus-SDM1" is ready for serial production

2S25M on trials

The Russian defense industry is ready to begin mass production of the new 2S25M Sprut-SDM1 self-propelled anti-tank gun. Recently, this combat vehicle completed all the tests, after which all the necessary documents were issued. Now, development organizations and manufacturers are waiting for an order from the Ministry of Defense, according to which they will launch the serial construction of equipment.

From project to series

The future SPTP 2S25M was created as an upgraded version of the existing 2S25 Sprut-SD product. The project was developed by the Design Bureau of the Volgograd Tractor Plant, taking into account the production of the Kurgan Machine-Building Plant (at that time both enterprises were part of the Tractor Plants concern; now they are part of the High-Precision Systems holding of the Rostec state corporation).

The first open display of the new model of self-propelled guns took place at the Army-2015 military-technical forum. Since then, "Octopus-SDM1" regularly appears at domestic exhibitions and has been repeatedly demonstrated abroad. In addition, the developers published photos and videos from the tests of this machine, showing its main features and advantages.

According to the first optimistic plans, the 2S25M product had to pass all the tests within a few years and enter the series. In the future, these plans were repeatedly adjusted due to the need for full-scale testing and fine-tuning of the design.

By the end of the tenth years, the experienced (or experienced) Sprut-SDM1 passed sea and fire tests on land. In the middle of 2020, on the shores and in the waters of the Black Sea, tests of the amphibious and landing qualities of the armored vehicle took place. The self-propelled gun has shown its ability to perform combat missions on land and on water, incl. in a subtropical climate. At the turn of 2020-21 in another area, winter tests of the car were carried out - in conditions of low temperatures, snow, etc.

Intermediate result

In August 2022, they announced the successful completion of state tests. The upgraded SPTP confirmed all the design characteristics and showed compliance with the customer's requirements. In the near future, the Ministry of Defense and the development enterprises had to carry out some of the remaining procedures, issue the necessary documentation and prepare the production line.

August 14, 2023 RIA News with reference to the press service of "High-precision complexes" spoke about the new success of the project "Sprut-SDM1". The development organization reports that after passing state tests, the new self-propelled gun is ready for mass production. The construction of such equipment will begin after its inclusion in the state defense order.

Now the future of the 2S25M product depends entirely on the customer or customers. State tests of the self-propelled gun showed its compliance with the requirements of our Ministry of Defense, and now it can place an order for production. Probably, such a contract will appear in the very near future. Accordingly, the delivery of finished equipment to the troops should be expected no later than 2024-25. The airborne troops will become the operator of the new SPTP. In the future, purchases for other branches of the military are possible.

The prototype "Octopus-SDM1" was repeatedly demonstrated at exhibitions, including with the aim of attracting foreign customers. It is assumed that such an armored vehicle is able to interest one or another foreign army, and export orders should appear in the future.

On a modern base

The current SPTP 2S25M is a deep modernization of the older 2S25 Sprut-SD combat vehicle. The latter was developed from the beginning of the eighties, but due to various factors, it reached mass production only in the two thousandths. The release of such equipment in the interests of the airborne troops lasted only a few years, and during this time no more than 35-40 armored vehicles were built.

Water tests

In 2010, it was decided to carry out a deep modernization of the 2S25 product, aimed at improving the overall characteristics and getting rid of the existing shortcomings. So, "Octopus-SD" was made on the chassis of a light tank "Object 934" / "Judge", which was not mass-produced and was absent from the troops. The production and operation of such a machine, which was practically not unified with other equipment of the armed forces, was excessively complex and impractical.

As part of the 2S25M Sprut-SDM1 modernization project, a new chassis was developed based on units of serial BMP-3 and BMD-4M. They also improved the fighting compartment, retaining the weapons and updating the controls. In this form, the new SPTP can be produced in a large series and easily operated by the troops.

Technical features

SPTP 2S25M "Octopus-SDM1" is an armored combat vehicle on a tracked chassis with cannon and machine gun armament on a full-rotation turret. Outwardly, in terms of its architecture and combat capabilities, such a self-propelled gun looks like a tank. In this regard, "Sprut-SD / SDM1" is often referred to as a light amphibious tank, although this does not meet the definition of the customer and developer.

The chassis for the Sprut-SDM1 was built on the basis of a modified and elongated hull from the BMD-4M. An engine compartment based on the UTD-29 engine with a power of 500 hp was also borrowed from the landing vehicle. The combat weight of the SPTP reached 18 tons, in connection with which the undercarriage was built on units from the BMP-3. Each side has seven road wheels with torsion bar suspension. Also, stern water cannons were borrowed from production vehicles.

The 2S25M product develops speeds up to 70 km / h on the highway. On the road, the car overcomes various obstacles. Water barriers with waves up to 3 points are crossed by swimming due to water cannons; speed - up to 10 km / h. Afloat, the self-propelled gun can fire from all available weapons and confidently hit targets.

The mass and dimensions of the Sprut-SDM1 meet the requirements of the military transport aviation. It provides for transportation, landing by landing method or ejection with a parachute system.

From the original Sprut-SD, the new SPTP inherited the turret and part of the fighting compartment systems. Thus, the 125A2 smooth-bore 75-mm gun-launcher is still used - a lightweight version of the 2A46 tank gun with a reduced recoil momentum. The gun uses standard domestic 125-mm separate loading shots with storage and feed from an automatic loader. Ammunition includes 48 shots with armor-piercing sub-caliber, high-explosive fragmentation and cumulative shells or guided missiles.

According to the fire control system, the Sprut-SDM1 is unified with the latest modifications of the T-90 MBT. There are optoelectronic sights for the commander (panoramic) and gunner, digital computing tools, a stabilizer, etc. The OMS is integrated with on-board communications and can receive data from outside. Due to this, SPTP can work in the contours of automated command and control systems.

Additional armament includes two 7,62 mm PKT machine guns. One is placed on a gun mount, the second - on a remotely controlled weapon station. There are also "Cloud" smoke grenade launchers.

Gun 2A72

The composition of the crew, despite the deep modernization of the machine, has not changed. A driver is still working in the corps control department, and a commander and a gunner are in the fighting compartment. Access to workplaces is provided by own hatches.

Desired outcome

Thus, the industry has completed the development and tested another interesting and promising model of armored vehicles. In the near future, the Ministry of Defense will have to issue an order, according to which High-Precision Complexes will launch mass production of the deeply modernized SPTP 2S25M Sprut-SDM1. In addition, foreign orders for such equipment can be expected.

Earlier it was reported that the Sprut products are intended for the Airborne Forces and should improve their ability to combat tanks and other protected targets. In fact, the Winged Guard will receive a light tank with the level of mobility and combat characteristics it needs. And the upgraded version of the 2S25, unlike the basic one, has every chance of becoming truly massive and positively affecting the capabilities of the troops.

Comments

[Leshak]

I think for internal use the order will be small. From a few dozen to a couple of hundred vehicles to reinforce paratrooper units. For air assault, the use is doubtful due to poor armor.

[Orange Bigg]

The Russian defense industry is ready to begin mass production of the new 2S25M Sprut-SDM1 self-propelled anti-tank gun. Recently, this combat vehicle completed all the tests, after which all the necessary documents were issued. Now, development organizations and manufacturers are waiting for an order from the Ministry of Defense, according to which they will launch the serial construction of equipment.

Now it only remains to wait for an order from the RF Ministry of Defense. I hope this wait will not drag on for years.

[George Sviridov]

It is more interesting whether they will equip artillery units (after they saturate the airborne forces), in terms of replacing obsolete and ineffective rapiers ... Because rapiers provide neither mobility, nor crew protection, nor sufficient power of both crowbars and land mines ...

[Sergey Aleksandrovich]

The car is not only for the Airborne Forces, but also for the Marine Corps.

[George Sviridov]

This is a replacement not for tanks, but for rapiers - which operate at direct fire, but whose openly located crew is not covered in any way, and cannot quickly change position. Therefore, there will be a significant increase in survivability, mobility and firepower.

[Ross xnumx]

I am not a vindictive person and, by virtue of my character, could not pass by:

Self-propelled anti-tank gun 2С25М "Sprut-SDM1" ready to mass production

From the classics:

 Show / Hide text

One Sunday, when the hosts left for early mass, and I, having put the samovar down, went to clean the rooms, the eldest child, climbing into the kitchen, pulled the tap out of the samovar and sat down under the table to play with the tap. There were a lot of coals in the chimney of the samovar, and when the water flowed out of it, it broke apart. Even in the rooms I heard that the samovar was humming unnaturally angrily, and when I entered the kitchen, I saw with horror that it was all blue and shaking, as if it wanted to jump off the floor. The soldered bushing of the faucet sank sadly, the lid slid to one side, drops of tin dripped from under the handles - the lilac-blue samovar seemed drunk to smithereens. I doused him with water, he hissed and sadly collapsed on the floor.
They rang on the front porch, I unlocked the door, and when the old woman asked if the samovar was ready, I answered briefly:
- Ready.
This word, spoken probably in embarrassment and fear, was taken as a mockery and aggravated the punishment. They beat me. The old woman acted with a bunch of pine torch, it was not very painful, but left many deep splinters under the skin of the back; in the evening my back was swollen with a pillow, and at noon the next day the owner was forced to take me to the hospital.

M. Gorky "In people"
* * *
By the way, try to re-read and compare your childhood perception of the work with the current one...

[Anatoly Proskurin]

What's so good about this tank fluff jabber? Don't you feel sorry for people? Any Western infantry fighting vehicle will pour bursts of bursts through this tin can !!! is not it?

[Revolver]

Quote: Anatoly Proskurin

What's so good about this tank fluff jabber? Don't you feel sorry for people? Any Western infantry fighting vehicle will pour bursts of bursts through this tin can !!! is not it?

The landing party has a choice between a tank with bulletproof armor and no tank, from the word "completely". However, if you think that it is possible to teach the T-90 to swim and parachute, good luck in this endeavor.

[Cympak]

The choice should not be made on the principle of "to be", but "why".
For what purposes is the "Octopus" needed?
For the destruction of tanks, anti-tank systems are more effective.
For direct infantry support, the BMD-4M is more effective.
For artillery support, Nona-SM and the upcoming Lotos are more effective.
And in what area is Sprut effective?
How are they planning to use it?

[Revolver]

Quote: Cympak

For the destruction of tanks, anti-tank systems are more effective.
For direct infantry support, the BMD-4M is more effective.
For artillery support, Nona-SM and the upcoming Lotos are more effective.

But the military transport aircraft is not rubber, and there is only room for 1 (in words: one) unit of armored vehicles. Which of the three will you take, and who / what will perform other functions?

Quote: Cympak

And in what area is Sprut effective?

All of the above. It may not be as good as that of a technique specially sharpened for this function, but anything is better than nothing.

[Cympak]

Based on the WTO restrictions, then you need to leave the BTR-MDM and BMD-4M in a ratio of 1 to 2

[Adrey]

Quote: Cympak

For what purposes is the "Octopus" needed?

Quote: Cympak

How are they planning to use it?

The same question. All of your listed arguments are undeniable.
More like this version of the dialogue between industry and the army:
Producer: "We've done it. Get more quickly and more."
Army: "Yes, we do not need this."
Producer: "How not to!? We did it!".
Army: "No need. How are we going to use it?".
Producer: "Don't twist our brains! We've done it, you take it! And then you'll figure out how to use it yourself. And if you don't take it, we'll complain! You know where and to whom!!!"

[George Sviridov]

Why is this octopus less effective than anti-tank missiles, especially since he himself is including anti-tank missiles.
The main plus over the birds is certainly the rate of fire, one machine can make a dozen volleys, even if half of everything hits, this is already up to 5 hit targets, at least 2-3 ...
Moreover, such a weapon is very effective in storming cities, when it can very accurately hit fortified positions...
BMD-4 can also, but the octopus weapon is seriously more powerful.
Moreover, it is not instead of Nona / Lotus, but in addition to them ...

[Taimen]

And how many "floating equipment" are used now? As if not. Maybe you don’t need to do too much? Get by with simple things, but reliable ones.

[George Sviridov]

Everything except tanks, in fact, the entire offensive near Kupyansk began with the crossing of equipment and the capture of the first bridgehead, a couple of months ago, then they threw in reinforcements, expanded the bridgehead, then they began to attack in depth, and only after that they began to build a crossing.
And once we have little floating artillery and floating air defense ... It’s lucky that Ukrainians have almost no aviation, against an enemy with aviation without floating artillery and air defense, any river without a beard can be insurmountable ... Because the troops crossed to stand and wait for the arrival of sense no, you have to go ahead and disperse, which means they break away from their air defense and artillery.

[George Sviridov]

This is an alternative to the rapier. And everything about it is better. This is not a tank, this is artillery. Modern, powerful, fast.

[1 z1]

The composition of the crew, despite the deep modernization of the machine, has not changed

[Amateur]

manufacturers are waiting for the order

They are optimists, "producers". They hope for "waiters" from the Moscow Region. As it is with Bulgakov:

In queue....

In line for orders for reconnaissance satellites, for AWACS aircraft, for counter-battery systems and much more.
But in the Moscow Region, in spite of everything, they continue to act about the precepts of Carlson from the roof

[Vadim S]

How many years have they been hoarding this car! With our filthy bureaucracy, it will not be tested and accepted in any way, it has time to become outdated, it is improved again and again for testing, as a result, the war forced to accept a light tank without armor. Otherwise, they would have tested it for a couple more years, the money goes to him, where to rush.

[Ivan Seversky]

Calculated % of destroyed vehicles among the affected armored vehicles on Oryx:
1.Tanks
Russia:
T-72b: 68% destroyed, T-80BVM: 60% destroyed, T-90m: 59% destroyed, T-72 mod. 2016: 52% destroyed.
Ukraine:
T-64: 65% destroyed, T-64 mod. 2017 51% destroyed, Leopard 2A6 22% destroyed.

2.BMP/BMD:
Russia
BMD-4m: 83% destroyed.
BMP-1: 68% destroyed, BMP-2: 65% destroyed, BMP-3: 63% destroyed
Ukraine:
BMP-2: 75% destroyed; Bradley and CV90: 45% destroyed.

The conclusions are simple:
1. modern Western technology is not a superweapon, but it provides noticeably better crew survival and this is without KAZ, which will drastically reduce the effectiveness of everything except the projectile. KAZ costs about $1 million for an infantry fighting vehicle and $2 million for a tank, i.e. it is more logical to put only on well-protected, expensive cars.
2. The survivability of the BMP-3 is not much superior to the BMP-1 and 2 and is clearly not sufficient. BMD-4m crew death capsule

Place of the Octopus in the Kunstkamera

[Cympak]

It is not clear from what percentages were calculated. From the total number or from those participating in the NWO? Where did you get the total?

[Ivan Seversky]

He counted the percentage of destroyed equipment from the total number of losses (which include both destroyed and lined and abandoned).
Analysis according to the Oryx portal. According to the number of losses, there may be somewhat biased data, but they clearly do not distort the degree of damage to equipment.

[NIKN]

Oryx, or Oryxspioenkop, is a Dutch defense analytics and military research website that collects information from open sources.

In open sources, Ukraine shoots down daggers of 7 pieces out of 3 launched. You would not present these figures for the ultimate truth.

[Arsen1]

Well, by the way, Oryx takes information not from the statements of the Ukrainian media, but from photos and videos, including from our side. They can see photos with geolocation for each loss

[ZeeD]

But doesn’t it bother anyone that the damaged and photographed equipment is sometimes repaired and put back into operation?
Only unequivocally destroyed can be considered once (although the same technique taken from different angles at different times is easily considered many times - no one has been caught on this).

[james]

Incorrect conclusions and figures. Everything is far-fetched

[james]

"Leopard 2A6 22% destroyed" from what quantity? Thrown into battle or delivered to Ukraine? Well, it's not a lot of different numbers.

[Ivan Seversky]

The counting mechanism is as follows, using the example of APU equipment:
-73 T-64s were lost, mod. 2017, of which 37 (51%) were destroyed, the rest were damaged or captured;
-9 Leopard 2А6 lost, 2 of them destroyed (22%)

[Arsen1]

from the number of people affected. oryx has a mark - destroyed and damaged. so 22 is the percentage of those destroyed from the affected. that is, 78% is simply damaged and, in the event of an evacuation, is subject to restoration.

[Catfish]

Oryx is a Dutch defense analytics and military research website.
The site is hosted by Stijn Mitzer and Joost Oliemans, formerly of Bellingcat. A very authoritative resource.

[james]

"Very authoritative resource." I get it - sarcasm

[Robin Robinson]

Yes, this is the same oryx that counted a bunch of times one wrecked Russian tank for 3 only from different angles, or Ukrainian for Russian.

[buv59]

Interest on "Leopards" is subjective. They are used with caution, so the percentage of losses is lower. And as soon as they leave, they get it in full. Now, if you gave the percentage of losses for these types of tanks: how many went on the attack and how many returned ......... Then you yourself would have made a different conclusion.

[Igor1915]

I don’t understand, all the time there are articles about the appearance in their t64-62-55 soon it will reach the t-34. Why launch a new one when the production of serial production will go faster, which, as I understand it, is not enough in the troops ??

[Non-fighter]

Thus, the 125A2 smooth-bore 75-mm gun-launcher is still used - a lightweight version of the 2A46 tank gun with a reduced recoil momentum. The gun uses standard domestic 125 mm rounds

How? With a muzzle brake?

[George Sviridov]

In the Airborne Forces, it is understandable, but the question of replacing outdated and too vulnerable rapiers with octopuses in anti-tank battalions of artillery units and subunits is interesting.

[Cympak]

Anti-tank divisions need to be transferred to anti-tank systems and kamikaze drones.

[cat Rusich]

Quote: George Sviridov

In the Airborne Forces, it is understandable, but the question of replacing outdated and too vulnerable rapiers with octopuses in anti-tank battalions of artillery units and subunits is interesting.

In 2019, the Airborne Forces formed three tank battalions T-72BZ - in the Tula and Novorossiysk divisions and in the Kamyshenskaya airborne brigade.
The Airborne Forces have not planned to jump with parachutes for a long time, so they are arming tanks - then why the Airborne Forces "light tank"when there is already "regular T-72BZ" ??

[George Sviridov]

This is not a tank, this is an anti-tank gun, and they should be considered not an alternative to tanks, but an alternative to rapiers ... Well, at worst, Shturm / Chrysanthemum.

[Cympak]

but the question of replacing outdated and too vulnerable rapiers with octopuses in anti-tank battalions of artillery units and subunits is interesting.

Isn't it easier to take a tank instead of the Octopus, an ordinary medium tank: T-72B3M or T-80BVM or T-90M?
There, the armor is much thicker, and the platform mastered in army units (and not a specific cart from the BMD-4M), and all the advantages in the form of maneuverability and firepower are available.
Stop looking for the use of "Octopus" in army units. Their place in the landing - Airborne Forces and MP

[chingachguc]

Yes, and the Airborne Forces do not need them. At best, the marines

[George Sviridov]

It may be possible to take it, only the army is not a PMC and not a Makhno gang, there is, for example, an art regiment, an anti-tank division in the state. The anti-tank guns put by him according to the state. The personnel are artillerymen, officers after art high schools, not tank ones ... How can they get tanks into the state, I xs.

[ZeeD]

Quote: Ivan Seversky

The conclusions are simple:
1. modern Western technology is not a superweapon, but provides noticeably better crew survivability

On what basis are these conclusions drawn?

[۩NRed۩]

Well, it is made on the basis of BMP 3. Do we have all motorized rifle units equipped with them in full?

[George Sviridov]

BMD-4, it is primarily for the airborne forces.
Although I hope that later the gunners will be interested.

[Sergey Aleksandrovich]

A lot will depend on the price. If the T-90M is more than twice cheaper, it may very well be that it will be used everywhere. Of the advantages, ease of transportation due to the small mass, and, accordingly, significantly lower fuel consumption than that of a tank.
And if things go badly, then we’ll see SPRUT-B rather than this car.

[Pavel57]

Everyone was confused by self-propelled guns or a tank.
...
In this regard, "Sprut-SD / SDM1" is often referred to as a light amphibious tank, although this does not meet the definition of the customer and developer.

Will it be a tank for export?

[Cympak]

Will it be a tank for export?

They are trying to push the "Octopus" to the Indians as a light mountain tank. They even hung additional armor, which obviously deprived the Octopus of the possibility of parachute landing and, possibly, buoyancy. But, I think that all tricks with additional armor will give maximum protection against 12.7 mm, but there is no way to fix the small angles of the UVN.

[buv59]

To be honest, it's hard to even say. If we take into account only the fighting in the NWO, then more armor is desirable. And it turns out that we create equipment for use in some conditions, but in fact others are obtained. When the decision was made to adopt the BMP-2, there were skeptics that the 30-mm caliber of the BMP-2 was in doubt. Then a BMP-2 was driven to the training ground, which took and fired at the tank. Everything was swept away from the tank turret, the sight was disabled. If there was a crew in the tank, then he simply would not have had time to shoot. This is all I need: a good gun in the absence of armor is a big question. Why make the "Octopus" floating if it is not useful. In local conditions, they will thicken the armor themselves. Remember the Afghan, how the BMP-2 was converted into the BMP-2D.

[dump22]

Booking like BMP, aluminum, that is, booking only from bullets.
The armor penetration of the 2A75 gun is not more than 300 mm of homogeneous armor steel,
In general, it looks like a suicide is the one who decides to ride on this against a "real" tank.

And it’s not at all clear, but why is it better for hitting a tank than an anti-tank system?

[Sergey Aleksandrovich]

Amnesia again? Against tanks, he has an ATGM launched through the barrel.

[dump22]

And why for an ATGM launcher weighing 19 tons and 3 meters high?
To be more noticeable from afar?

And if you really want to "carry" anti-tank systems, then Fagot or Kornet have long been regularly placed on a conventional infantry fighting vehicle, without a tank smoothbore gun.

[chingachguc]

Somewhere in Indonesia it will come in handy. They love everything that floats. And why should we? Floating technology in Europe is a big mistake

[Radical]

Quote: Taimen

And how many "floating equipment" are used now? As if not. Maybe you don’t need to do too much? Get by with simple things, but reliable ones.

Well, you va-sh-e-e .... In video reports about the SVO, they constantly flash - BMP-1,2,3; BMD ..., MTLB, "Carnations", and much more. You probably wanted to say that the "swimming" capabilities of this technique are not used, but here there are a number of questions. Either the personnel, including commanders, are poorly trained in the use of these capabilities, they do not know how to prepare equipment for use "afloat" with all the consequences ..., lack of experience in the mass use of these capabilities, since all previous years the army was taught to fight "terrorists" , and not fighting with regular parts of a potential enemy. Does anyone remember the exercises with the mass landing of amphibious assault forces, or the crossing of the river by at least a company of the Airborne Forces, or MSR? I don't remember. The maximum was shown by the actions of the engineering troops, for crossing the rivers with their regular means - ferries, PTSmi, and we often saw the same infantry fighting vehicles, armored personnel carriers, MTLBs on them .... I quietly went nuts from such a picture, and was wildly surprised why floating equipment was transported by ferry .... Well, the last, optimistic, what I would like to believe in - maybe the time ... "H" will still come when these opportunities are required ... .

[czes]

Stupid stillborn idea - a tank gun on a light floating chassis.

[Artem B]

The advancing army needs floating equipment. All types. And there will still be many rivers and streams ahead. The enemy will not leave capital bridges intact. Yes, and floating type PMP will interfere with the functioning, because he has the means for this, unfortunately. Therefore, technology will have to force water barriers. The first will go floating armored personnel carriers and infantry fighting vehicles, and to support the advanced echelon "Nona" with "Vega", and "Octopus". There is simply no other. For the rest of the non-floating equipment, PTS and GSP are suitable, but everything must move, since stationary objects, I repeat, will not stand for a long time. And everything else, most importantly, will depend on the skill of the commanders and the skill of the fighters.

[Yellow bubble]

THERE ARE NO MUCH CARS AND AGAIN MAYBE THE OLD OCCUPITS ARE IN THE MARINES. IT IS NECESSARY LIKE AIR.

[Serge]

Where does such a howl come from? Now the soldiers are welding guns on armored personnel carriers and tractors to gain mobility, but here you go, here it is again, howling from the whoops, their protection is weak. But it’s not a tank and the tasks are different.

[Bodipancher]

The Americans are making the same vehicle; the troops need a light, passable, mobile vehicle with normal firepower. It’s not for nothing that they put Rapiers on MTLB.

[czes]

Stillborn child. What theater of operations were they planning for?