Military Review

BMD-3 based combat vehicles (Part of 2) Sprut

67



History self-propelled anti-tank gun "Octopus-SD" is quite complicated, so we will limit ourselves to mentioning only its main stages. In the 1970s Research and development work was underway to create a new generation of self-propelled anti-tank guns (SPTP). Interest in a self-propelled armored vehicle with a powerful anti-tank gun was shown, in particular, by airborne troops. An analysis of the development trends of foreign armored vehicles, conducted at the 3rd Central Research Institute of the USSR Ministry of Defense, showed that the effectiveness of anti-tank weapons in the airborne forces is already insufficient to combat tanks enemy, which he will inevitably use to deal with airborne assault forces. While the Ground Forces can engage the main battle tanks in the fight against enemy armored vehicles, this is impossible in parachute landings. Military transport capabilities aviation and means of landing allow the use of machines with a maximum mass of about 18 tons as part of the parachute landing.

By that time, the development of a light tank (code “Judge”) armed with an 100-mm rifled gun and adapted for paratroopering had already been completed, and a light tank on the topic “Yacht” was carried out at VgTZ. But the project of a light amphibious tank, as is known, was stopped at the same time when OCD was asked about the Bakhcha BMD.

At the same time, studies conducted by CNIITOCHMASH specialists have shown that it is possible in principle to switch from the caliber of the 100 anti-tank gun mm (based on ballistics and ammunition of the standard smooth-bore gun T-12) to the caliber 125 mm. Experiments with a prototype model on the BMP-2 chassis confirmed that the X-ballistic 125-mm gun of the D-81 smooth-bore tank gun can be mounted on a light carrier provided that the artillery unit has been modified. C1982 in TsNIITOCHMASH conducted studies of the possibility of creating an airborne self-propelled anti-tank gun, the most unified on the artillery part of the easel gun. Based on these results, a protocol of the Commission of the Presidium of the Council of Ministers of the USSR from 29 July 1983 was charged with conducting preliminary studies to determine the possibility of creating an 125-mm SPTP for the airborne forces on the unified landing gear nodes of a promising airborne assault vehicle.

Initially it was assumed that the PTP would not only solve the tasks of fighting the enemy’s tanks and armored vehicles, but also conduct fire on its personnel and fire weapons, support the airborne units with direct fire during the attack of the capture object, and act directly in the combat formations of the airborne combat vehicles at attack and in repelling the enemy attack on the march. This required the quality of the light tank and the corresponding ammunition from the SPTP, however, the term “light tank” was no longer used. The work was carried out under the auspices of the GRAU, which, unlike the GBTU, could not engage in “tanks”. Of course, specialists from VgTZ and OKB-9 “Uralmashzavod” (plant No. 9, Sverdlovsk, now Yekaterinburg) participated in the R & D works - the manufacturer of the 125-mm tank gun.

The experience of creating a light tank still gave the basis for the start of work on the UTP. A prototype model of the tank “Object 934” (“Judge”) was transferred to the TSNIITOCHMASH through the GBTU and GRAU. This chassis is in 1983 — 1984's. and made an experimental model of an airborne 125-mm self-propelled anti-tank gun. The installation of a cannon in a fixed wheelhouse (as in the previous Soviet anti-tank SAU, including airborne assault systems 57 and SU-85) was refused, as well as a rendered weapon installation. The new SPTP was developed with the installation of a gun in a habitable rotating armored turret. In the turret version, the gun was first supplied with a muzzle brake and a two-plane stabilizer. However, the muzzle brake had to be eliminated - not so much because of the shells with a detachable pallet and disclosed plumage (this problem was solved by the corresponding profile of the muzzle brake), but rather due to the presence of an ATGM shot in the ammunition: the release of hot powder gases from the side windows of the brake could lead to loss of control of the rocket. The muzzle brake also created a muzzle wave, directed sideways and back, but the gun had to operate in the combat formations of the paratroopers, possibly with a landing force on the armor. In addition, during this research, the composition of the instrumentation complex and the scheme of stabilized targeting drives in the fire control system were substantiated.

Experimental firing conducted at 1984 at the 38 research institute in Kubinka showed that the maximum overloads acting on the crew (crew members) during the shot, angular movements of the hull and overpressure in the trunnion area did not exceed the permissible norms, residual waste and the suspension penetration was absent, while the accuracy of the shooting was at the level of regular tank systems.

The decision of the Military Industrial Commission of the USSR Council of Ministers on 20 June 1985 asked OCD to create an 125-mm self-propelled anti-tank gun, which was assigned the code Sprut-SD. VgTZ was appointed as the lead contractor; on TSNIITOCHMASH (Klimovsk, Moscow Region) and VNIITRANSMASH (Leningrad) assigned scientific and technical coordination of work and participation in the technical and economic assessment. The new machine received an index "Object 952".

In the work on the chassis, weapons and instrument equipment participated OKB-9 "Uralmashzavod", Central Design Bureau ON "Krasnogorsk plant them. S.A. Zvereva ", Central Design Bureau" Peleng "(Minsk), All-Russian Scientific Research Institute" Signal "(Kovrov), Instrument Design Bureau (Tula), Volgograd Shipbuilding Plant, NIMI (Moscow). In February, the Moscow Aggregate Plant "Universal" was issued a tactical and technical task for the creation of airborne landing gears, which ensure the landing of the Sprut-SDE with a crew of three people inside. Also participated in the work of the Research Institute of the Ministry of Defense.

OKB-9 "Uralmashzavod" was simultaneously engaged in towing a self-propelled version of the 125-mm anti-tank gun "Sprut-B"; it was put into service in 1989 under the designation 2А-45М. The installation of the 125-mm cannon on the GAZ-5923 wheeled chassis, the future of the BTR-90, was also considered.

From the opening of the ROC on the topic of the Sprut-SD to the adoption of the PTP into service, twenty years have passed. Among the main reasons for such a time gap are not just the collapse of the USSR and the collapse of the country's economy. In addition to the withdrawal of the state order and a sharp drop in the financing of the defense industry, the collapse of previous production ties had a most negative effect. So, the sight-device of guidance "Bug" was developed in Belarus, where for some time separatist sentiments prevailed.

And yet, by a decree of the RF Government on 26 of September 2005, No. XXUMX-r, and by an order of the Minister of Defense of the Russian Federation on January 1502, 9, 2006-mm self-propelled anti-tank gun 125-X2 "Sprut-SD" was adopted. The order for the CTP 25C2 received VgTZ.

Of course, the machine type 2C25 "Sprut-SD" can not replace the main battle tanks. However, lightweight machines by weight, similar to tanks in their firepower, but with high air-mobility and the ability to drop from the air or from the sea are necessary for rapid reaction forces in modern conflicts. Work on them has been going on for a long time in different countries, but in the Sprut-SD, for the first time in world practice, an airborne airborne weapon system with firepower of the main battle tank was implemented (most foreign developments in this category use guns of a “tank” caliber, but reduced ballistics).

The combat vehicle 2C25 is arranged according to the classical scheme with the front control compartment, the middle one - the combat compartment with the deployment of weapons and crew members in a rotating turret and rear - MTO. The commander and the gunner are placed in the tower in a combat position; when landing and in the stowed position, they are located on the universal seats in the control compartment - respectively, to the right and left of the driver.

The 125А2 smoothbore gun installed in the 75 tower provides firepower at the level of the T-72, T-80, and T-90 tanks. The length of the gun barrel - 6000 mm, the mass of the gun - 2350 kg. For shooting, the whole range of separate-cartridge loading shots for 125-mm tank guns can be used, including shots with armor-piercing sabot piercing shells with a detachable tray and with an 9М119 ATGM (3UBK14 shot) launched through the gun barrel. The ATGM control is semi-automatic, by laser beam. Penetration - 700-770 mm with overcoming dynamic protection. Rate of Fire - 7 rds / min.

The installation of 125-mm guns of high ballistics, designed for a combat vehicle of about 40 t mass, on an 18 t mass product, moreover in a turret version, required a number of special design solutions. In addition to increasing the rollback length more than doubled - up to 740 mm (compared to 310-340 mm for 125-mm guns of the main battle tank), the body of the carrier vehicle itself was also rolled back due to the operation of the hydropneumatic chassis suspension. Before the recoil impulse affects the crew and mechanisms, the cannon rolls back relative to the turret and the hull rolls back relative to the lower branches of the tracks, resting on the ground. It turns out a kind of double rollback, absorbing the recoil energy of a powerful gun - just as it was done earlier, for example, in railway artillery conveyors. The nonlinear characteristic and high energy intensity of the air suspension of the chassis, the high dynamic motion of the rollers inherent in it, played its role here. When the hull rolls back, it “crouches” a little, and the length of the bearing surface of the tracks increases, which contributes to the stability of the SPTP when fired.

7,62-mm PKT machine gun (PKTM) with 2000 rounds of ammunition loaded into ribbons is paired with a gun. Vertical guidance angles - from -5 to + 15 °, while turning aft - from -3 to + 17 °. Installation of weapons stabilized in two planes. The fire control system includes a laser range finder and a digital ballistic computer.

BMD-3 based combat vehicles (Part of 2) Sprut


SPTP 2C25 "Sprut-SD" with means of landing P260M


The gunner’s workplace is equipped with the 1А40-1М instrumentation complex, the TO1-KO1Р Buran-PA night-sight (complex) and the TNNO-170 surveillance devices. The commander’s place is equipped with a 1K13-ZS combined aiming-sight device with a field of view stabilized in two planes, a night branch, a laser range finder, an ATGM information control channel, a duplicate ballistic device with communication channels with a ballistic computer of the gunner’s sight, a system for entering aiming angles and lateral control in the position of the gun relative to the line of sight, the remote control autonomous control of the automatic loader and pointing drives with the possibility of real-time transfer the board of the complex on command of the commander from the gunner to the commander and vice versa. This ensures the interchangeability of the commander and the gunner. The multiplicity of the day channel increase in the sight of the commander 1K13-3С - 1х, 4х and 8х, night - 5,5х. For the circular review, the commander is served by periscopic observation devices TNPO-170, TNPT-1.

The automatic loader of the gun includes: a rotating conveyor with 22 shots (shells and charges placed in cassettes), a chain mechanism for lifting the cassette with elements of a shot, a mechanism for trapping and removing gunfire pallets, a chain (two-way) shotgun of elements of a shot from a cassette into a gun, a drive of the lid the hatch of emission of the pallet and the movable chute, the electromechanical stopper of the gun at the loading angle and the control unit. To obtain an increased rollback, the automatic loader has a wider frame of the cassette's lift, inside of which the details of the mechanism for capturing and removing the fired pallets during the rollback enter. The mechanism for trapping and removal of the pallet is placed on the end part of the breech of the gun with the possibility of delaying the pallet. The mechanism is designed so that it is possible to temporarily block the back side of the end part of the breech of the cannon and with the subsequent movement of the fired pan purge the breech zone with air from the cleaning system. The latter has an air duct from the filtering device to the breech zone of the gun and to crew jobs using a rotating air device. The shape and dimensions of the automatic loading conveyor allow crew members to move inside the vehicle from the crew compartment to the control compartment along the hull sides.


SPTP 2C25 "Sprut-SD" after landing


The hull and tower of SPTP 2C25 are made of aluminum armor alloy, the frontal part of the tower is reinforced with steel plates. The tower is mounted 81-mm installation system 902В "cloud." SPTP is equipped with a system of protection against weapons mass destruction.

The MTO is equipped with a four-stroke multi-fuel diesel engine 2В-06-2С, which develops HP 510 power, and a hydromechanical transmission interlocked with it. The transmission includes a hydrovolume turning mechanism and provides five speeds of forward and the same reverse.

The chassis includes on one side seven rollers, four supporting rollers, the drive wheel - rear location. The high (28,3 hp / t) power density of the engine in combination with a hydropneumatic suspension and low ground pressure provided the car with good running characteristics.

Water barriers "Sprut-SD" overcomes without additional devices, movement afloat provide two water jets. The machine has good seaworthiness: in case of agitation up to 3 points, it can not only overcome water obstacles without a move, but also conduct aimed fire in the forward sector of shelling, equal to ± 35 °.

SPTP 2C25 "Sprut-SD" is transported by military transport aircraft. Airborne assault is carried out by parachute method.

Performance characteristics 2C25 "Sprut-SD"

Gross weight, t .............................................. .... 18
Crew, cel ............................................... ........... 3

Air transportation ............. by IL-76 type (M, MD), An-22

Height at working ground clearance, mm ............................................ ...... 2720 (wind gauge - 2980)
Length with forward cannon, mm ............................ 9771
Housing length, mm ...................................... 7070
Width, mm ............................................... ..... 3152
Ground clearance mm ............................................. 100— 500 (worker - 420)

Armament gun:
- brand ................................................ ........ 2А75
- caliber (mm), type .............. 125, smooth-bore
- loading ...................................... separate, automatic
- rate of fire, rds / min ....................... 7

machine gun:
Brand .............................................. PKT ( PCTM)
- caliber, mm .............................................. ... 7,62

Weapon targeting angles:
- horizon ............................................... ..360 '
- vertically forward ..................... From -5'to + 15 '
- vertically back (astern) ...... From -3'to + 17 '

Ammunition:
- shots to the gun ..................... 40 (of which 22 - in the automatic loader)
- types of shots ................ high-explosive fragmentation, cumulative, armor-piercing subcaliber, ATGM14 (launch through the barrel of the gun)
- ammunition ................................................ ..... 2000

Armor protection:
- frontal .................... from the fire 12,7-mm machine guns (in the sector ± 40 ')
- circular ........................ from fire 7,62-mm weapons

Engine:
- type ............................................. four-stroke 6- cylinder diesel with gas-turbine turbocharger, direct fuel injection, liquid cooling
- brand ................................................ ..2B-06-2С
- power, hp (kW) ............................. 510 (375)

Transmission .......................... hydromechanical, with hydrostatic rotation mechanism

Suspension of road wheels ............ individual pneumatic

Caterpillar ........................ steel, two-ridge, zevochnogo gearing, with successive rubber metal hinges

Main track width
tracks, mm ............................................... .... 380

Water propulsion, type ...... hydro jet

Maximum speed km / h:
- on the highway ............................................... ..70 — 71
- afloat................................................ .......... 10

Average dry speed
dirt road, km / h ............................... 47 — 49

Power reserve:
- on the highway, km ............................................. .... 500
- by dirt road, km ............................... 350
- afloat, h .............................................. ......... 10

Ground pressure, kg / cm2 ................. 0,53

Originally planned landing with the help of parachute-reactive means. The development, which received the designation PNNUMX, was carried out by the Universal plant (Moscow) together with the Research Institute of Parachute Engineering (Moscow, the parachute system) and NPO Iskra (the city of Perm, powder rocket engines). They took as a basis parachute-reactive tools PNNUMX, developed for landing BMP-260; As a basic rocket block, a brake rocket manufactured by NPO Iskra, borrowed from the soft landing system of the Soyuz-type descent cosmic apparatus, was considered. The technical design of the PRS PNNUMX for the Sprut-SD was reviewed and protected in 235.

Although several prototypes of the ORS were manufactured and a full cycle of preliminary ground tests was carried out, the analysis of the ORS operability revealed a large number of shortcomings consisting primarily in the complexity and bulkiness of the design of the PRD cassette unit, the high manufacturing cost and complexity in operation. During the preliminary flight tests revealed problems in the work of the selected parachute system. In addition, ORS demanded higher qualifications of the staff. And the difficult economic situation in the country that was formed during the “market reforms” did not allow even carrying out tests of P260 facilities with brake propulsion systems.

As a result, by a joint decision of the Air Force, Airborne Forces and the MKPK Universal from 30 in May 1994, the PRS variant was canceled and approved the development of the Sprut-PDS tools in the multi-domed parachute free-form system with air damping, maximally unified in terms of operating principles, components and components serial means of landing PBS-950 for BMD-3. The parachute variant of the Sprut-PDS landing gear was designated P260M. The differences in the design of the PNNUMXM from the PBS-260 are due to an increase in the mass and dimensions of the landing facility itself.

The basis of the P-260М was the 14-dome parachute system MKS-350-14М (based on the unified parachute block with an area of ​​350 м2) with the exhaust parachute system UPPS-14 and the air damping of the forced filling with the mechanical block of the supercharging-unified, which is unified, and it is standardized by the standardized XPS-950 parachute system. . The minimum landing height had to be increased from the three hundred to four hundred meters indicated in the TTZ.

Here again, the collapse of the integrated system for the development of armament of the Airborne Forces, the means for their landing and military transport aircraft was manifested: by the time of the adoption of the Sprut-SD, the P2M had only undergone flight design tests, and the upgraded Il-25MD-XNUM aircraft - flight tests.

The revision of the design of the Sprut-SD 2C25, which affected the external contours of the car, required changes to be made in the landing gear. At present, the PNNUMX landing means in the variants for the landing of the “260 Object” and “The 952A Object” have been brought to the state testing stage.






The features of ПХNUMXМ include the absence of a central hub (the carriages for securing cargo to the monorail are fixed directly on the body of the machine) and the introduction of a hydrodrop system of orientation of the landed object in the direction of the wind. In this case, the role of the front ax is played by the front carriage, which is detached after the object leaves the aircraft during the landing. Suspension system includes an automatic coupler with a 260-second pyro retarder. The mass of landing gear is within 12-1802 kg, which provides a flight weight of a mono-cargo about 1902 kg.

It is possible to drop one object from the IL-76 aircraft, and two from the IL-76M (MD). The height of the landing above the landing ground is from 400 to 1500 m at the speed of the flight of the aircraft using the 300-380 km / h. Maximum vertical overloads upon landing - 15 g. To quickly bring the machine into combat readiness after landing serves the system of accelerated de-mooring. Without its application, the time of freeing the machine from the landing facilities manually did not exceed 3 minutes in tests.

25 March 2010 in the framework of the 76 th Airborne Division exercises on the Kislovo near Pskov landing area as part of the parachute assault of the 14 units of military equipment were successfully landed by the Sprut 2X25 SPrut-SD and BMD-XNIMX 4 of August of the same year carried out similar dropping of the Sprut-SD and BMD-25M to the Budihino landing site near the city of Kostroma.


Author:
Articles from this series:
BMD-3 based combat vehicles (1 Part) BMD-4
BMD-3 based combat vehicles (Part of 2) Sprut
Fighting vehicles based on BDM-3 (part of 3) "Shell", etc.
67 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. avt
    avt 2 March 2013 12: 20
    +9
    Now, right now, the scream will be that it is a coffin, and there is no armor, and it does not hold mines. In general, a normal airborne model of self-propelled guns, but they will want to demand from it as from the main tank. Is not it, Mr. Pupyrchaty?
    1. Pimply
      Pimply 2 March 2013 12: 32
      +6
      No. Just in time for this car I have no questions. Good technology - and in its place. Obsolete, of course, and requiring development. But even now she is capable of performing tasks. Well, until it’s used as a tank
      1. avt
        avt 2 March 2013 12: 35
        +3
        Quote: Pimply
        No. Just in time for this car I have no questions. Good technology - and in its place

        Well and good. They just made ten of them, it seems, and slowed down. It’s a pity, the gain is solid, it inspires.
        1. Pimply
          Pimply 2 March 2013 12: 44
          +3
          24 cars for 2011
      2. TUMAN
        TUMAN 2 March 2013 14: 32
        +2
        Quote: Pimply
        No. Just in time for this car I have no questions. Good technology - and in its place.

        I can’t believe my eyes! I read it several times!
        Quote: Pimply
        Obsolete, of course, and requiring development.

        Well, as always, purely Jewish!
        1. Pimply
          Pimply 2 March 2013 15: 19
          0
          Quote: TUMAN
          Obsolete, of course, and requiring development.


          That is, you think it is necessary in idiotic terms - with slogans and hats?
          1. TUMAN
            TUMAN 2 March 2013 15: 42
            +3
            Quote: Pimply
            That is, you think it is necessary in idiotic terms - with slogans and hats?

            It’s just from you, and some other Jewish personalities, that there is no healthy criticism bordering on the paranoia of all the weapons produced in Russia. At the same time, propaganda, or advertising, (as anyone) of Western models is being conducted! I need to agree with you that healthy criticism will not hurt, it may even be beneficial, but you don’t have it, all Russian stuff! The question is, about the essence of your presence here? Are you a provocateur? Are you a troll? Do you carry out informational or subversive activities? Apparently, you are all listed together! That's why I have such a reaction.
            1. fzr1000
              fzr1000 2 March 2013 22: 58
              +2
              No, let the person write. Anyway, discussion is useful.
      3. TUMAN
        TUMAN 2 March 2013 18: 55
        +2
        Quote: Pimply
        No. Just in time for this car I have no questions. Good technology - and in its place

        I did not believe my eyes! I read it several times!
        Quote: Pimply
        Obsolete, of course, and requiring development.

        This is so in Jewish!
        Dear moderators! Please tell me what is prohibited in this post? Why did you delete it? I specifically repeated it.
    2. Avenger711
      Avenger711 2 March 2013 15: 01
      +2
      The most powerful. The American shameful MGS, which, when fired, nearly knocks over aside.
    3. Mikhado
      Mikhado 2 March 2013 15: 20
      +2
      avt,
      Security against at least the most massive RPGs can be raised using DZ for light armored vehicles - I saw one for BMP-3, large boxes. True, a loss of water availability is possible, and the dimensions for landing may not allow.

      I have only one question - with such a damping system, what does shooting on board look like? Is the running gear performance reduced?
      And why abandoned the DT, as in the towed version ??
      1. avt
        avt 2 March 2013 16: 38
        +1
        Quote: Mikhado
        Security against at least the most massive RPGs can be raised using DZ for light armored vehicles - I saw one for BMP-3, large boxes. True, a loss of water availability is possible, and the dimensions for landing may not allow.

        But it’s not necessary, here is the very case when the best enemy of the good. An excellent self-propelled artillery mount specifically for landing, just an attack like a tank does not need to go with it. Improve instrumentation and that's it.
        1. bask
          bask 2 March 2013 18: 34
          +2
          Quote: avt
          necessary, here is the very case when the best enemy of the good. Excellent self-propelled artillery mount specifically for landing

          The ideal machine for the Airborne. Do not strangle not add.
          It’s a pity that there are only a few in the troops. And how necessary is it in the Airborne Forces and the Marines. Moreover, during the stool they took all the T-62 from the Marines. Nothing was needed in exchange. It should have arrived, Octopus-SD, but in my opinion the fleet of more than one unit has not been received.
          1. erix-xnumx
            erix-xnumx 3 March 2013 05: 38
            0
            I wonder where in the Marine Corps were the T-62? Which fleet?
      2. avt
        avt 2 March 2013 18: 38
        0
        Quote: Mikhado
        And why abandoned the DT, as in the towed version ??

        I missed it, I'm sorry, here I think such a thing, but why. A normal floating platform, it’s quite compact, which actually is necessary, but what’s towed request in principle, it is possible if an alternative mechanical traction is provided. laughing By the way Octopus such towed is in the VET option to replace the good old weave
      3. Lopatov
        Lopatov 2 March 2013 19: 06
        0
        Quote: Mikhado
        And why abandoned the DT, as in the towed version ??

        It turned out not needed. The recoil likely turned out to be more effective than the towed version
  2. 123dv
    123dv 2 March 2013 12: 22
    +1
    Handsome!
    ................................
  3. urich
    urich 2 March 2013 12: 28
    +3
    T-72 in aluminum housing smile
    The gunner’s workstation is equipped with the 1A40-1М instrument complex. The commander’s position is equipped with a combined 1K13-ZS pointing device
    There were good complexes for their time. But, probably, it was possible to stick thermal imagers. The main task is the fight against tanks. It will be hard to confront modern tanks in real combat.
    Although the landing is not used to. All is better than spears and slingshots.
    1. Avenger711
      Avenger711 2 March 2013 15: 02
      0
      Against tanks can be MANPADS.
    2. nnz226
      nnz226 2 March 2013 15: 09
      +2
      If, according to the regulations, the landing force lands in the operational depth of the enemy, then it will not soon come to a real battle with the enemy's tanks (I do not take the case when a certain enemy tank unit is in the landing area for redeployment), tk. tank units are usually located in the tactical depth, and in order to throw them against the landing force, it will take a lot of time to redeploy. With the task: "to destroy something and wash away", a tank battle may in principle not take place. With the task: "to capture and hold until the main forces approach," you have to dig in and bury yourself in the ground, as in the last photo of the article, there is a chance to survive. I think there are no idiot commanders in the Airborne Forces who will throw SPGs to attack tanks. From this back in the WAR we unlearned.
      1. Pimply
        Pimply 2 March 2013 15: 21
        0
        Now the tactics of using tanks has changed a lot. And on what the Airborne Forces fought in real conditions - look at the pictures from the Five-Day.
        1. malkor
          malkor 2 March 2013 17: 38
          +1
          looked, bmd3-certification standard equipment and what?
          1. Pimply
            Pimply 2 March 2013 23: 58
            0
            Mostly BMD-2. How fit is it for real modern combat?
      2. urich
        urich 2 March 2013 16: 09
        +1
        Octopus is not a self-propelled gun. There are self-propelled guns in the Airborne Forces. NONA 2С9. Even the article says: The story of the Sprut-SD self-propelled anti-tank gun is quite complex
        The main purpose of this "apparatus" is fighting tanks. But with this struggle, there will be difficulties. My idea is that if you have made such an expensive car, then you need to make it absolutely advanced! And to stick everything MOST modern there! At this forum, the advantages of a thermal imager over optics have been discussed more than once. Well, they would have done it even more expensive, since they did it anyway. Although, as I wrote above, there is fish for fishlessness and cancer ... It's good that at least there is such a thing.
        1. bask
          bask 2 March 2013 19: 23
          +1
          Quote: urich
          or the advantages of the thermal imager over optical

          Naturally a thermal imager. It is desirable domestic and three-channel.
          I read on ,, Courage ,, the entire history of creation ,, Strut.Sd, starting with ,, Object 934,934B, 688,675. A really detective story 25 years long. But it’s worked out. From and to.

          ,, OBJECT 934 ,, PROTOTYPE, ,, SPRUT-SD, ,,
  4. Aaron Zawi
    Aaron Zawi 2 March 2013 12: 55
    +6
    Very worthy self-propelled guns for landing operations.
    1. bask
      bask 2 March 2013 19: 37
      +2
      ,, SPRUT-SD, "this is not self-propelled guns, but essentially a light amphibious tank. So it was designed and built .. self-propelled guns for the airborne. this is NONA AND SAU ,, Vienna ,, 120mm.
  5. Nayhas
    Nayhas 2 March 2013 14: 40
    +2
    What places is the Airborne going to parachute? All armored vehicles of the Airborne Forces are designed to operate in the deep rear of the enemy, where there are no tanks, artillery, mines, in the worst case, police forces on armored personnel carriers. In order for the BTA to be able to get into the landing squad without any losses, the enemy’s inactive air defense forces must be inactive. In addition, an offensive operation should be conducted in the direction of the landing site, otherwise the enemy will draw up his forces to this place and crush the landing force, whose resources are limited. It turns out that the Airborne Forces can be used only in case of a surprise attack. There are simply no other options.
    1. 123dv
      123dv 2 March 2013 15: 00
      +1
      All life is made up of options.
      They are always there!
    2. malkor
      malkor 3 March 2013 00: 05
      0
      But what about the battle at an altitude of 776, the Airborne Forces company has completely fulfilled its task (well, I think that everyone knows the situation has wiped out the situation).
      Airborne are the most trained troops and this expands the options for use.
    3. NOBODY EXCEPT US
      NOBODY EXCEPT US 3 March 2013 21: 44
      0
      And used everywhere ..... in all cases ...
    4. NOBODY EXCEPT US
      NOBODY EXCEPT US 3 March 2013 22: 22
      +1
      And what does air defense have to do with it? Do you think that transport will fly without cover? Tasks of the Airborne Forces is a quick deployment of troops, and not everywhere there is a lane capable of taking for example IL-76 and then there will be a drop out, and I won’t attack the enemy, but somewhere near, although everyone has their own opinion ....
  6. NAPOLEON
    NAPOLEON 2 March 2013 15: 17
    +1
    modern conditions are not needed. with whom to fight on this (miracle). yes and when was the last military landing? amphibious troops are a product of the concept of the 30s and the subsequent cold war. successful amphibious operations in world history can be counted on the fingers and then they were all carried out against a poorly prepared enemy They were also accompanied by heavy losses. The withdrawal of the landing troops is not used under the current concept of using troops, and their weapons are undermined under the old concept of using landing troops.
    1. Pimply
      Pimply 2 March 2013 15: 21
      0
      Well, about a poorly trained opponent - debatable.
    2. urich
      urich 2 March 2013 16: 31
      +1
      http://ria.ru/analytics/20130226/924696124.html Вот статейка (на мой взгляд очень достойная) о месте ВДВ в современном мире и перспективах развития.
      1. malkor
        malkor 2 March 2013 18: 10
        +1
        everything flows, everything changes
        and the Airborne Forces remain one of the best anywhere in the modern world
  7. NAPOLEON
    NAPOLEON 2 March 2013 18: 04
    +1
    successful operations of the airborne troops. This is the landing of the Germans in Cyprus or the Crete mage to err. The English garrison fled and the Germans suffered substantial losses. Jews landed in Egypt during the British attempt to return the Suez Canal. and the last Fonkle war, the English airborne assault could be destroyed but the Argentines were completely incapable of even having food. this is about the use of parachutists. does not apply to special operations where small groups were used. if someone else remembers
    1. bask
      bask 2 March 2013 19: 47
      +1
      Quote: NAPOLEON
      small groups. if someone else remembers

      I agree. A new unified ,, middle ,,, platform is being created ,, Kurganets ,,
      But while it enters the troops ,, Octopus-SD ,,, SAU NONA and ,, Vienna ,, in the airborne forces and the marines., Nothing to replace. Up to 20-25. The new Minister of MO just need to resume deliveries, this equipment in the troops.
  8. avt
    avt 2 March 2013 18: 52
    +3
    Quote: NAPOLEON
    successful operations of the airborne troops. this is the landing of the Germans in Cyprus or the Crete mage to err the English garrison fled and the Germans suffered significant losses

    In Crete, and the most unsuccessful - the losses are big with the stupid resistance of the Angles. After her, Hitler Student generally forbade large-scale actions to be held.
  9. APASUS
    APASUS 2 March 2013 20: 13
    +1
    Even the Spaniards in 35 g realized that such machines have a fairly large firepower and speed !!
    Tiznaos MC 36 based on Hispano-Suiza T-69 truck built by La Sociedad Comercial de Hierros in
    1935, before the war.
    1. unclevad
      unclevad 4 March 2013 18: 03
      0
      Notice how the wheels are made competently. Internally somewhat larger in diameter of the outer. On hard roads - less rolling resistance.
  10. pooop
    pooop 2 March 2013 22: 22
    +4
    Yes, I watched a couple of vidos, how this machine shoots, and then starts to swing like a nesting doll)))
    __
    but initially the idea is good!
    everything always rests on the chassis, as they did not know how to do it and did not learn it, there is always an inorganic docking of the tower complex with the chassis ...
  11. super-vitek
    super-vitek 2 March 2013 23: 32
    +1
    Discussion class! I consider this RPG machine to be afraid, it should not be wise, it should not come within the range of its shot. Against tanks, in principle, from an ambush with high-precision ammunition, why not? And quickly retreat. But this is an option. But in general, as a self-propelled gun to strengthen the attack power of the landing, if there is still normal target designation, just a class !!! And the exterior of the "SPRUT" is gorgeous!
    1. Old skeptic
      Old skeptic 3 March 2013 01: 23
      +2
      Where did the tanks and RPGs, as well as ATGMs from the rear — they all keep at the forefront! There are no minefields either. What an ideot in its rear will put minefields. (this is Pimple about BMD-3 and 4)

      If the landing is properly planned, it goes synchronously with the main blow, then the landing has a great chance of not meeting all this.
      1. Pimply
        Pimply 3 March 2013 04: 04
        +1
        And from the camel. Because in conflict zones of low intensity, where there is a high probability of undermining, the airborne forces will continue to move on their own machines, without proper protection.

        Tanks in the rear from the same place, where they always come from - not everyone drives to the front lines, there is an echeloned cover, not one or two lines of defense, including in the deep rear. Where do you get the situation that all this is kept only at the forefront, what kind of stupidity? At the front edge, only a small part.
        1. Old skeptic
          Old skeptic 3 March 2013 12: 57
          0
          And who throws the landing between two lines of defense, directly on the enemy’s head? All of the above funds still need to be pulled into the landing zone, and this takes time, the landing is already deploying, moreover, the main attack is gaining strength.
          This does not apply to conflicts of low intensity. It’s necessary to separate flies from kaklet, we’re talking about airborne landing technique, airborne, not a motorized rifle, or even a marines, they have their own and very specific conditions.
          1. Pimply
            Pimply 3 March 2013 16: 48
            0
            I understand that very well. Just finding a point where there is no technology is difficult. Because it’s still necessary to break through to the rear of the enemy, and hoping that there are no tanks and weapons there is stupid. They are there.
  12. Old skeptic
    Old skeptic 2 March 2013 23: 48
    +3
    Not all developed countries have highly effective military air defense (even our probable friends, "I was specifically interested in this issue"), this was given great attention only in the Union and now in Russia (here even the landing force itself has its own air defense system ... SYSTEM!).
    Throwing an airborne assault into the tactical depths of the enemy, with the correct preliminary work of the front-line aviation, can be quite effective, unless, of course, breaking like moose into objects covered by powerful air defense. And in this case, this technique will greatly help the Airborne Forces. You just do not need to use the Airborne Forces as motorized rifles, but if you still use it, then the equipment at the time of the operation should be motorized rifle, with all the consequences ....
    1. Pimply
      Pimply 3 March 2013 00: 02
      +3
      And this is a perfectly right moment. Only the Airborne Forces of the Last 70 Years - Elite Motor Rifles Howling on the Technique for Airborne
      1. Old skeptic
        Old skeptic 3 March 2013 00: 25
        +2
        We do not have a correct understanding of the concept of the Airborne Forces, in my opinion, the Airborne Forces are troops for a major war, not local conflicts. Their task is to strike in the tactical rear of the enemy, directly behind the line of combat collision of large formations of the opposing sides (in which he bent belay ) Because if you plunge deeper there is already an object-oriented air defense and aviation should work in a completely different way to suppress this dirty trick. And a sudden jump into the territory of the enemy will face the same trouble (if the enemy is not Papuans).
        And for the local ones, you need to create elite motorized rifle units, like the Airborne Forces, but with the appropriate equipment and call them whatever ... "War Assault Troops" or something else (so that the guys can be in the fountain on their day ... and jerk the vest on the chest, like the marines and paratroopers fellow > drinks > angry > good ).
        1. Old skeptic
          Old skeptic 3 March 2013 01: 17
          +1
          What is the minus? Can you comment? Or just out of spite? wink
          1. Pimply
            Pimply 3 March 2013 17: 10
            +1
            Minus to minus gives a plus;)
        2. Pimply
          Pimply 3 March 2013 17: 13
          0
          A correct understanding of the concept of the Airborne Forces is that the troops should fight, and not prepare all the time only for a war, which, perhaps, will never happen. The airborne forces should be an elitist, flexible and independent structure, not tailored only for parachute throwing. The tool here was turned into a principle, and this airborne assault ruins as a real and effective force.
  13. max702
    max702 3 March 2013 11: 46
    +1
    On Courage they discussed this car in the landing section and agreed (and it seems that the former landing itself mostly spoke) that what for it is not needed, there are no tasks for it, if it’s 2-3 shots at tanks and all the same on infantry it’s NONA better It works, and so an expensive toy (how much does a tank gun cost? And shells for it? The aiming angles are scanty, the barrel’s resource is small) And notice if the pimpled praises it, it’s not casual ...
    1. Pimply
      Pimply 3 March 2013 16: 54
      0
      Dear, I have had some very close friends who went through Chechnya - the first and second, some in the landing, some in the intelligence, and some just served in the Russian army. I will not praise the technique, which is bad only because it was produced in Russia - this is the hobby of the patriots sitting on the site. Well, Octopus - if you carefully read what I write - I do not praise. It’s just that I don’t have any particular complaints about this technique until it is used as a tank. It is outdated, we need another, more intelligible machine, but at least they are not buying it now at 60 million apiece, like BMD-4, which for today's realities is a coffin. Sorry, I don’t want someone’s stuffed pocket or show-offs to decide the life of my friends.
    2. NOBODY EXCEPT US
      NOBODY EXCEPT US 3 March 2013 21: 50
      +2
      Plus! I also do not understand what NONA did not like ???
      1. Lopatov
        Lopatov 3 March 2013 21: 56
        +1
        This is a machine for another purpose.
      2. ProkletyiPirat
        ProkletyiPirat 8 December 2017 03: 46
        0
        Quote: NOBODY EXCEPT US
        Plus! I also do not understand what NONA did not like ???

        NONA only in words "new ground artillery gun ", in fact there is nothing new. So, for example, NONA cannot shoot BOPs, they also have problems with cumulative weapons, they don’t plow at close range, they don’t have enough at a long distance, everything is normal in the middle. With ammunition it’s also complete J. Like everything is there, but when you start shooting no, no, more precisely, but not those. After all, it doesn’t have a unified high-explosive fragmentation projectile for all projectile flight paths from minus 5-15 to plus 80-90, because there’s constant torment "what to carry yourself as a BK. "
  14. Larus
    Larus 3 March 2013 19: 47
    0
    That has its own light and with a big gun, for which it was necessary to generally climb abroad and even think about buying an import .....
  15. Misantrop
    Misantrop 3 March 2013 21: 59
    +1
    Quote: NOBODY BUT US
    I also do not understand what NONA did not like?

    At an intensive rate of fire, some of the additional charges that have not been burnt out fly back into the fighting compartment at the feet of the crew. I myself did not see them close, but my brother said that he had seen the explosions of "Non" more than once because of this. The crew usually does not survive this ...
    1. NOBODY EXCEPT US
      NOBODY EXCEPT US 3 March 2013 22: 06
      +2
      As far as I remember, additional charges are used when firing mines, for 2 years I have never seen NONA blown up for this reason, although I had RESTOST but was connected directly to NONA. very few .... very.
      1. Lopatov
        Lopatov 3 March 2013 22: 10
        +1
        I also did not hear about the frequent explosions of "Non" during the shooting.

        Even "Robots" will work more efficiently against tanks at the Airborne Forces.
      2. Old skeptic
        Old skeptic 3 March 2013 22: 22
        0
        And towed more?
        1. Lopatov
          Lopatov 3 March 2013 22: 28
          +2
          Even less. And ATGMs have a lot more.
          1. Old skeptic
            Old skeptic 4 March 2013 01: 03
            0
            How many ATGM shots can you take? What is the range of shots?
            Good DZ AZ and you have a problem with armor penetration (the shot is slow and only camouflage, even tandem, do not forget about active interference).

            And here: it is capable of firing a wide range of ammunition of four types - armor-piercing subcaliber 3BM42, 3BM46, 3BM42M (partially) cumulative ZBK29 (M), high-explosive fragmentation shells ZOF26 with an Aynet remote-detonating system, with an electronic fuse 3B-12, OFS at a given point on the trajectory, this increases the efficiency of firing at hovering helicopters and manpower in the trenches, guided by missiles, which can be put into ammunition in any ratio.
            Russian BOPS from ammunition are somewhat inferior (and possibly not inferior at all) in terms of armor penetration to their American counterparts, but surpass them in speed. For example, the armored penetration of the ZBM-42M from the T-90A ammunition is estimated at 650-700 mm KGS, and the 3BM-46 is 650 mm (2000 m distance), while the American BPS M829A2 from the M1A2SEP ammunition penetrates 710 at the same distance (750 according to analytical data) mm KGS (rolled homogeneous steel).

            Unless of course the designers do not lie, that can use all of our tank nomenclature. winked
            1. Lopatov
              Lopatov 4 March 2013 01: 22
              +1
              Quote: Old Skeptic
              How many ATGM shots can you take?

              Why wear them? There is a "Robot"



              You can create an analogue on the basis of "Shells" and at the same time replace "Bassoon" with "Cornet". Nomenclature is a tandem with armor penetration higher than that of a subcaliber projectile (1000-1200 at a distance of 100 to 5500 meters), high-explosive and "volume". That's enough.
              1. Old skeptic
                Old skeptic 4 March 2013 11: 19
                0
                Sorry Nikita Sergeevich, I did not recognize you. recourse You are absolutely right!
                1. Lopatov
                  Lopatov 4 March 2013 11: 30
                  0
                  And is that all you can write about this?
                  1. Old skeptic
                    Old skeptic 4 March 2013 16: 04
                    0
                    And what's the point of breaking spears?
                    The old "missiles versus guns" debate is old, meaningless and useless.
                    Everyone will remain in their own opinion.
                    1. Lopatov
                      Lopatov 4 March 2013 17: 18
                      0
                      Do you think the Kornet is less effective against tanks than the Sprut?
                      1. Old skeptic
                        Old skeptic 4 March 2013 23: 09
                        0
                        The tank gun uses a wider range of ammunition, including ATGMs (more versatile weapons).
                        The mass of the warhead and the speed of an artillery tank shot is much greater than that of the "Kornet" (half of the mass of a shot is made by the engine), respectively, the power is greater (especially a high-explosive shell).
                      2. Lopatov
                        Lopatov 4 March 2013 23: 22
                        0
                        The power of the Kornet's high-explosive warhead is equal to the power of a 152-mm projectile. I'm not talking about the volume.
                        In addition, for firing high-explosives, it is much more effective to use "Nona" and their development - self-propelled guns created according to the ROC "Crimp"
                      3. Old skeptic
                        Old skeptic 5 March 2013 02: 37
                        +1
                        Quote: Spade
                        The power of the Kornet's high-explosive warhead is equal to the power of a 152-mm projectile.


                        You mean a thermobaric warhead? Theoretically, yes, in practice it is possible to argue that the high-explosive fragmentation projectile of the tank is much more powerful than the thermobaric one, especially in the open field (the zone of destruction by the fragments is much larger + remote detonation). I have already written above about ammunition for a tank gun. Tetmobar or Horsh volumetric ammunition in relatively confined spaces: gorge, canyon, street or building, pillbox, etc. A land mine in the "Cornet" is weaker, the mass of explosive is less.

                        And "Nona" is essentially a self-propelled automatic mortar, which does not detract from its merits.
                        Different guns are needed, different guns are important ... wink
  • Lopatov
    Lopatov 3 March 2013 22: 06
    +1
    This is if you shoot shells. And while it is wrong to store charges.
    Due to the high cost of the shells, they were hardly used. Mines fired.
  • Bad_gr
    Bad_gr 4 March 2013 17: 55
    +1
    Misantrop
    At an intense rate of fire, part of the unburned additional charges flies back to the fighting compartment at the foot of the calculation.



    How does part of the charge get into the fighting compartment?
    1. Lopatov
      Lopatov 4 March 2013 18: 01
      0
      This could happen. The obturator does not fly away on shells
    2. ProkletyiPirat
      ProkletyiPirat 8 December 2017 04: 24
      0
      Quote: Bad_gr
      How does part of the charge get into the fighting compartment?

      This can happen with any of the shots, but the shells (those with rifled) have a higher probability since they have more hitch MVV.