Video interview with A. Yakovlev - leading designer of the BMPT "Frame-99"

11
Video interview with A. Yakovlev - leading designer of the BMPT "Frame-99"

Support combat vehicles tanks, which are in service with our army - without any doubt, a long-standing subject of controversy that continues to this day.

On the one hand, which once seemed like a completely unviable project, BMPTs, although with great difficulty, still squeezed into the domestic army structure. Moreover, these products have proven their effectiveness in practice, participating in battles during a special military operation in Ukraine.



On the other hand, there are justified questions regarding the machines regarding the choice of weapons and, most importantly, their very concept. After all, as you know, the development of military equipment of this class began back in the 80s of the last century - and those prototypes and projects were significantly different from what we see today, both in layout and in the set of fire weapons.

An interview with A. Yakovlev, the leading designer of the BMPT "Frame-99", better known now as the "Terminator", allows us to learn about some of the nuances in this matter.

The video is certainly quite old, but very informative and answers some questions about the development of the machine.


Yakovlev talks about the work on creating the “Frame”, including the original sight and the reasons for abandoning the Kornet anti-tank guided missiles in favor of the supersonic “Attack” for arming the BMPT.

In addition, the designer briefly and very ambiguously mentions why the military for a long time refused to accept the product for service, demanding “something between a sledgehammer and a microscope,” and not a highly specialized microscope.

Also during the interview, Yakovlev discusses the topic of creating very effective combat vehicles based on the existing T-72 tanks and the shortcomings of the Armata, which turned out to be a much simpler version of a promising tank, in contrast to its predecessor, the Object 195 with an uninhabited turret and 152- mm smoothbore gun, which completely disappeared into oblivion in the 2000s.

In addition to ground combat equipment, the designer touches on the issues of creating ground-effect aircraft (including their economic benefits) for moving combat units and missile attacks, and at the end gives his assessment of the monopoly of design bureaus and their rejuvenation.

11 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +1
    20 June 2024 05: 38
    Everything is correct, everything is wonderful...
    With the advent of attack UAVs to support tanks, it will be necessary to create something ZRPK with cheap missiles against cheap drones. There are already developments in this regard and this is encouraging.
    https://topwar.ru/244570-vysokotochnye-kompleksy-razrabotannye-dlja-zrpk-pancir-sm-malogabaritnye-zur-podtverdili-svoju-jeffektivnost-protiv-dronov.html
    Such a combat “trio” will be effective.
    * * *
    And one more thing...Russian names have greater survivability...Take the same example with “Katyusha”. Maybe let the enemies there have “Terminators”, and we will have, for example, “Plantain”... feel
  2. 0
    20 June 2024 08: 27
    In general, I’m right, and the rest are Turks!
  3. +3
    20 June 2024 08: 29
    and at the end he gives his assessment of the monopoly of design bureaus and their rejuvenation.


    I hope Belousov will “get around to” this problem
    1. +1
      22 June 2024 21: 02
      There are several markers, such as Project 22160 patrol ships and the lack of shelters for aircraft. We'll see, we'll see.
  4. +2
    20 June 2024 10: 26
    The design of modern tanks is such that whoever opens fire first, no matter what caliber, wins. And Ramka has an advantage - the ATGM will fire earlier and at a greater distance, while the tank turns its gun, loads and fires, but at close range, Frame will simply blind the tank with its rapid-fire artillery.. They forgot the purpose of the tank, to fight infantry, not tanks. The Tiger tank had a hole in the armor for the sight about 5 cm, but now the sight is a half-meter superstructure, vulnerable even to small arms
    1. +2
      20 June 2024 11: 21
      . And Frame has an advantage

      Apparently Yakovlev is right about the survivability of the Frame. The ammunition has been removed. In the event of detonation of ammunition, a mountain of 30 mm shells is preferable to several tens of 125 mm shells. At least there's a chance
  5. 0
    20 June 2024 11: 27
    I specifically looked for real samples of ekranoplanes. I didn't find any. Moreover, in the search they slip in “wIG-powered ekranoplanes with the ability.”
    IMHO it's a stupid scam for money. My favorite Equip has surfaced again, a mysterious basin capable of making several turns around a ball with a teaspoon of kerosene.
    1. 0
      21 June 2024 00: 43
      Type in the search for ekranoplan “Caspian monster” and “Eaglet”. There is a video of the launch of an anti-ship missile from the Orlyonok.
      1. 0
        21 June 2024 16: 52
        These are not ekranoplanes
  6. 0
    22 June 2024 21: 18
    First, the shortcomings. The vehicle does not have space for landing and, accordingly, for the evacuation of crews of damaged vehicles. It does not have air defense functions, or rather, it has them even in a worse form than the BMP-2/3 due to the insufficient vertical guidance angle. It does not have reconnaissance means to detect either enemy artillery or drones.
    Among the advantages, only better protection against detonation of ammunition should be noted.
    If the Epoch module is completed and put into production, it will surpass the capabilities of the terminator's weapons.
    The car was already outdated the moment it left the assembly line. There are serious doubts about the possibilities of its modernization in the difficult modern conditions of conducting SVO.
  7. 0
    23 June 2024 10: 00
    Thanks to the author - finding and interviewing such a specialist is very difficult!
    In A. Yakovlev's monologue - everything is to the point - neither subtracting nor adding.
    It is clear that some of the problems already at the stage of acceptance of technical specifications in the Ministry of Defense can be explained by the decreased level of competence of specialists involved in the development and adoption of technical specifications. The presence of hidden agents of Western intelligence services cannot be ruled out - for many years, EBN and his accomplices created hothouse conditions for the penetration of Western intelligence services into all significant government agencies. The destruction of the education system, the practical disappearance of social elevators for intelligent youth have also led to a decline in the quality of young specialists... In addition, generations of senior specialists from whom one could learn a lot are already in another world, the remainder are retired... All this is a consequence , to put it in the style of a bygone social system, the bestial grin of the era of primitive accumulation of capital...