Military Review

BMP-3: Modernization potential not exhausted

91
BMP-3: Modernization potential not exhaustedHuge merit in the creation of the BMP-3 belongs to Alexander BLAGONRAVOV, chief designer of the SKB Kurganmashzavod from 1974 to 1989 years. Under his leadership, an enormous amount of work was done on the development of infantry fighting vehicles. The BMP-3 introduced 111 inventions and patents of specialists from the special engineering design bureau. Today Kurganmashzavod and SKBM are part of the Concern Tractor Plants.


BMP-3 embodies cutting-edge ideas in various fields of science and technology. The body of the car is made of armored aluminum sheets. The car has an original layout with rear engine compartment. The troop compartment is designed for five paratroopers with two additional places. The location of the hatches and doors allows for quick landing. Forcing water obstacles does not require additional training. The machine is equipped with a smoke screen system, an automatic fire extinguishing system, communications equipment, and integrated dosimetric equipment.

The turret’s armament is stabilized in two planes, includes a 100 mm gun - an anti-tank missile launcher with an automatic loading system for shells, a 30 mm automatic cannon with a two-tape supply of ammunition of choice and a 7,62 mm machine gun. The fire control system allows you to fire from a standstill and afloat, hitting the enemy’s manpower day and night in an open field and shelters, as well as infantry fighting vehicles, Tanks and low flying helicopters. It includes a laser rangefinder, ballistic computer, two gunner’s sights, commander’s sight, commander’s observation device.

The BMP-3 is air transportable; it can be transported by rail, road or sea. It successfully combines excellent mobility, the highest firepower and reliable protection and is equally well suited for special operations and general combat.

At the same time as the BMP-3, the BMP-3F infantry fighting vehicle was developed and adopted for use by the Marine Corps, border and coastal troops. The design of the BMP-3F compared with the BMP-3 has been amended to increase the buoyancy and stability of the machine. Naval the option has high maneuverability afloat, has the ability to move at a level of excitement of 3 points, and can also fire with the necessary accuracy at a level of excitement up to 2 points. The time the machine was continuously in the water was increased to 7 hours with the engine running, which ensures the safety and reliability of the BMP-3F in various conditions at all stages of its use at sea. Powerful water-jet engines provide confident maneuvering and loading onto landing ships under their own power from the water during rough seas. The design of the BMP allows towing the same product when operated on water, moving in tow behind sea raid boats and going ashore in the presence of a breaking wave.

Due to its excellent mobility, protection and firepower combined with exceptional reliability, the BMP-3F has become one of the world's best examples of a floating combat vehicle as unified as possible with the linear BMP-3.

Also on the basis of the BMP-3 in the 90-s, the commander's BMP-3K was created and put into service, intended for conducting combat operations as part of a unit, controlling the battle by the commander, and communicating with other units and with the higher level of command and control. The main tactical and technical characteristics and weapons are the same as those of the BMP-3, but the machine is additionally equipped with navigation equipment, radio stations, a receiver, an antenna mast device, intercom equipment, and an autonomous power generator.

Another vehicle based on the BMP-3 is an armored repair and recovery vehicle BREM-L. It is used to evacuate defective (damaged) infantry fighting vehicles, other light-duty vehicles by weight from under enemy fire, and to assist crews in the repair and maintenance of vehicles in the field. The machine is also adopted by the Russian army.

The BMP-3 chassis can be used to install various weapons systems, both Russian and foreign, including artillery systems, air defense systems, as well as multi-purpose missile systems. Complexes "Chrysanthemum-S" and "Cornet" in Russia adopted.

A comprehensive modernization of the BMP-3 was carried out in the 90-ies. JSC "SKBM" together with co-contractors on the basis of the TTZ has developed a modernized version of the machine, as well as options for upgrading previously supplied machines. Machines in a modernized version passed state tests. The BMP-3 has the potential for further improvement in many ways. But in today's quality, it remains one of the best and most versatile of all known combat vehicles of similar purpose and class in the world. Alexander BLAGONRAVOVA, the chief designer of this machine, managed to create a unique machine, the modernization potential of which has not yet been exhausted.

In the photo: BMP-3; BMP-3F; upgraded BMP-3 with TSHU-1M complex.
Originator:
http://www.mashportal.ru/
91 comment
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. cyclist
    cyclist 23 May 2013 10: 36 New
    +4
    excellent BMP, interesting sets with DZ are provided?
    1. orff
      orff 23 May 2013 10: 47 New
      +2
      there is a backlog - this is very good. OK. Good luck !!!
    2. The comment was deleted.
    3. Zheka Varangian
      Zheka Varangian 23 May 2013 11: 30 New
      15
      S D.Z. BEAST MACHINE !!!!
      1. ultra
        ultra 23 May 2013 13: 27 New
        +1
        Quote: zheka Varangian
        S D.Z. BEAST MACHINE !!!!

        The first time I saw this beast in the ninetieth year, in the Vladikavkaz School, officers from the department of armored vehicles didn’t respond very flatteringly, they showed flaws that were later confirmed, modernization is a good thing, but it’s time to export and the troops have to supply new equipment!
      2. DDW
        DDW 23 May 2013 14: 23 New
        +1
        Do you know PERSONALLY with this BEAST ???
        These machines are more than 20 (!!) - summer development and production.
        And what new has appeared during this time? N and h e about.
        In this article, I personally did not find anything that would express hope ... for the appearance of new samples.
        Yes, at least these were given to the troops ...
      3. sscha
        sscha 23 May 2013 15: 49 New
        +1
        I compare my BMP-1: earth and sky !!!
        Modified engines?
        1. bask
          bask 23 May 2013 16: 41 New
          +1
          Quote: sscha
          Modified engines

          It is simply necessary to upgrade the BMP-3, but how many units are there in the troops? Hundreds, no more.
          It is much more important to modernize the fleet, in thousand units of BMP-1.2.
          If carried out, competently modernization will serve for another 10 years.
          Modification by the company FNSS BTRa M113.
          I think we have something to teach.
          1. bask
            bask 23 May 2013 16: 52 New
            +1
            AFTER MODERNIZATION M 113.
            The result was a modular platform. With installation, various types of weapons. Strengthened mine and ballistic protection.
            armaments. Boom defense is strengthened.
  2. yanus
    yanus 23 May 2013 10: 41 New
    18
    BMP3 can be upgraded, but it was already made as a ready-made complex. You don’t especially go around in terms of security.
    The new BMP needs to be done with an engine excess in power and the same frame strength. The armor, which is placed on the "base" model should hold heavy machine guns, the forehead - 30mm guns. To this set of additional removable armor - protection from 30mm guns in a circle. On top of this, an additional set of dynamic protection + grilles is available. And under each theater of combat "to change clothes" BMP. We need to throw it through the air - we remove everything with two sides, in one the BMP itself, in the other add. protection. It is necessary to steal in urban conditions - we hang everything and so on.
    And weapons (100mm + 30mm + ATGM) and now on the BMP is enough. Improving it makes sense sights, calculators, communications, etc.
    1. cyclist
      cyclist 23 May 2013 10: 52 New
      +2
      after all, KAZ Arena can be put on it, although the cost in this case will increase
      1. Nick
        Nick 23 May 2013 16: 58 New
        +1
        Quote: cyclist
        after all, KAZ Arena can be put on it

        Then it is better for the personnel not to get out of it, KAZ and its own landing force, located in the vicinity of the BMP, can cripple ...
    2. Dmitry 2246
      Dmitry 2246 23 May 2013 10: 54 New
      +9
      Our misfortune is communications, sights, logistics, intelligence.
      1. trenitron
        trenitron 23 May 2013 19: 40 New
        +2
        Add from personal experience .... more crew security
  3. il grand casino
    il grand casino 23 May 2013 10: 43 New
    +4
    It is necessary to modernize ... until the armature is completed
    1. Nick
      Nick 23 May 2013 17: 06 New
      +2
      Quote: il grand casino
      It is necessary to modernize ... until the armature is completed

      BMP and Armata are machines for different purposes, Armata is created as MBT, and not a new generation BMP. BMP and MBT complement each other, but do not replace ...
    2. Nick
      Nick 23 May 2013 17: 42 New
      +1
      I will supplement it. On the Almaty platform, the option of creating a heavy infantry fighting vehicle is possible, but such a machine will certainly not be floating, and airborne as well.
      1. il grand casino
        il grand casino 24 May 2013 17: 40 New
        0
        About heavy bmp and speech ... I am not a supporter of continuing to do bmp with the level of reservation that is available ...
  4. OlegYugan
    OlegYugan 23 May 2013 10: 50 New
    +5
    Beauty. love THANKS
    I hope the Syrian experience is taken into account.
    1. Nayhas
      Nayhas 23 May 2013 11: 01 New
      +2
      Of course, there are stencils with prayers in the landing compartment on the sides, all the same there is no chance to get out of this mass grave ...
      1. Alexey Prikazchikov
        Alexey Prikazchikov 23 May 2013 11: 08 New
        +3
        Of course, there are stencils with prayers in the landing compartment on the sides, all the same there is no chance to get out of this mass grave ...


        This is exactly how our behi were the mass graves of the infantry and remained. Can even Kurganets come out normal.
        1. No_more
          No_more 23 May 2013 12: 02 New
          +8
          Yes, the BMP is not a tank, and tank armor can be pierced and body armor is not a guarantee of salvation from a bullet. You can’t say anything here.
          It seems to me that this only suggests that a time will soon come when one infantryman will be able to carry such firepower that the meaning in passive armor will disappear, as happened with knightly armor. Maximum bulletproof up to 12,7 mm.
          1. Nayhas
            Nayhas 23 May 2013 12: 24 New
            12
            The question is not even the reservation, but the layout, getting out of the BMP-3 is very difficult, especially on the go or under fire, and even in winter clothes ... The presence of two paratroopers with machine guns in front of the machine is generally nonsense, to aim fire on the go from unstable weapons is impossible, to land through the hatch up is also not easy. The frontal projection is protected only by the body armor (in BMP1 / 2 the protection was supplemented by an engine), and there are three people there, in the event of a shell getting there they have no chance. So the term "mass grave" for BMP-3 was fixed from the moment it entered the army.
            1. No_more
              No_more 23 May 2013 14: 00 New
              0
              I was also surprised by such a layout always. So it remains to guess after this what the new platform will be and whether it will be possible to sell the old equipment.
              1. Explore
                Explore 23 May 2013 15: 34 New
                +1
                What to guess then?
                Boomerang - engine in front, closer to starboard side.
                Kurganets-25 - engine in front, closer to the starboard side.
                Armata - two models were originally planned with the front (for BMP) and rear (for the tank) engine layout.
                If you believe the representatives of the plant, they refused from the rear location (unification?). We are waiting for the Russian Carrot.

                I note that in Kurganets and Boomerang, the MV is to the right of the engine and therefore is not protected by it.
            2. IRBIS
              IRBIS 23 May 2013 15: 34 New
              +9
              Quote: Nayhas
              The frontal projection is protected only by the body armor (in the BMP1 / 2 the protection was supplemented by an engine), and there are three people there, in the event of a shell getting there they have no chance. So the term "mass grave" for BMP-3 was fixed from the moment of entry into the troops.


              I have not heard such a term. And when any projectile hits any lightly armored object, the result is the same - the object ceases to exist regardless of the location of the engine. Their reservation is not intended to protect against shells.
              1. Nayhas
                Nayhas 24 May 2013 08: 21 New
                +1
                The question is not about keeping the combat vehicle, but about the chances of the crew and the landing force to stay alive.
            3. Nick
              Nick 23 May 2013 17: 13 New
              0
              Quote: Nayhas
              The presence of two paratroopers in front of the machine with machine guns is generally nonsense, it is impossible to conduct targeted fire on the move from unstable weapons,

              Yes, but they are not given such a task. Their task is to create a high density of fire in the direction of the enemy, which is why there are two machine guns, and not SVD.
              1. Nayhas
                Nayhas 24 May 2013 08: 26 New
                +1
                The task of ANY weapon is not to create fire density, but to hit the enemy, which is achieved by aimed shooting. Dense obstructive fire is conducted only in a defensive battle from previously shot positions and the main goal is not to defeat the enemy, but to block his offensive operations.
                1. IRBIS
                  IRBIS 24 May 2013 10: 25 New
                  +1
                  Quote: Nayhas
                  The task of ANY weapon is not to create fire density, but to hit the enemy, which is achieved by aimed shooting.

                  And here it is not true. Any infantryman knows such a thing as the density of fire and the fact that it is measured by the number of bullets per running meter. And no one has yet canceled the tasks of increasing the density of fire in battle.
            4. Alekseev
              Alekseev 23 May 2013 22: 08 New
              +1
              Quote: Nayhas
              The frontal projection is protected only by the body armor (in BMP1 / 2 the protection was supplemented by an engine), and there are three people there, in the event of a shell getting there they have no chance.

              Relatively light armored vehicles, such as BMP-3 and there can be no chance "in the event of a shell getting there" (and air bombs yes ) Well this is not a tank (and the tank’s chances are far from 100%)
              Well, not anti-ballistic booking at BMP and armored personnel carriers! request
              In my memory, there was a case when, in the BMP-1, a practical shell (without explosives) of a 125 mm D-81 (T-64) gun was accidentally hit.
              Even without a break, this was enough for everyone who was in the car to die (9 people).
              Not everyone realizes the power of modern (and not so much ammunition)
              For example, when preparing tank weapons for normal combat (T-55 tanks with a 100 mm d-10t and t-64 cannon), we decided, for the sake of interest, to fire several shots at the ISU-152 hull, which stood at a range from about 1000 m.
              Shot with practical shells. 55-round shell - a steel blank flashed 90 mm ISU armor for take-off and flew further.
              Practical 125 mm - soft shell without explosive cumulative projectile. He could not penetrate such armor. He simply tore out the armor plate of the SPG cabin and threw it 10 meters away.
              That's it. So ISU-152 weighed, in contrast to the BMP, somewhere 46 tons.

              1. Nayhas
                Nayhas 24 May 2013 08: 31 New
                +3
                In addition to tank guns and anti-tank artillery, there are enough means of destruction on the battlefield and the better the equipment is protected, the greater the chance of survival. The layout of the BMP-3 is the worst of the options.
          2. Black Colonel
            Black Colonel 23 May 2013 15: 38 New
            0
            Why not 14,5 mm?
        2. SergeySK
          SergeySK 23 May 2013 12: 03 New
          +9
          Alexey Prikazchikov

          Call yourself a reservation level capable of guaranteed to hold both 30mm and at least an RPG. Also, the level of reservation of the bottom is able to keep undermining a trotyl bucket (about 20 kg).

          And then, in a conversation about Kurgan, you can safely say to yourself, "Give up hope everyone entering here!" ! !

          God forbid if from the sides Kurganets will hold 12,7mm while remaining within 25t and will be able to swim! Otherwise, his fate will be sad!

          There will be 100 pieces running in combat guard in the Strategic Missile Forces and Air Defense! ! !
          1. Alexey Prikazchikov
            Alexey Prikazchikov 23 May 2013 15: 49 New
            +9
            The Germans have mounted modular armor in order to keep in a circle of 30 millimeters. And our screens are saving us from RPGs like that back in agan, so they hung 62. Now everything is doing this to NATO, and we have safely lost all the achievements. In order to keep a landmine, you need a wedge-shaped bottom like on armored personnel carrier 90 and chairs mounted to the roof so that the spine does not break. There is nothing particularly technological in your requirements; everyone has already come up with us. you just need to take and apply all the best practices. By the way, chairs for the roof are mounted and a wedge-shaped double bottom we came up with back in the 94th. And the NATO are using all this on their BMPs and armored personnel carriers. And the quality should be tightened up with comfort, so take a look at what the Czechs muddied up to look at any expensive and compare how disgustingly our bmp and armored personnel carriers are made:
            1. Alexey Prikazchikov
              Alexey Prikazchikov 23 May 2013 15: 50 New
              +3
              here's another clickable photo
              1. Alexey Prikazchikov
                Alexey Prikazchikov 23 May 2013 15: 52 New
                +1
                the rest is here http://otvaga2004.mybb.ru/viewtopic.php?id=663&p=29

                Just appreciate how the whores work and how we do. But we have everything "having no analogues in the world."
              2. zaitsev
                zaitsev 24 May 2013 00: 07 New
                0
                now the BMP is not amphibious, overloaded, the landing party can no longer fire from the loopholes (for complacency at least). And most importantly, why, if there are tanks in the army?
                We are not Czechs, the country is big, there are no roads, there are many rivers, we don’t like to upgrade armored vehicles at all (unfortunately).
                I would be limited to the “Arena”. And to teach the landing force to interact with it, so as not to go under shrapnel.
                1. Alexey Prikazchikov
                  Alexey Prikazchikov 24 May 2013 00: 28 New
                  +2
                  now the BMP is not amphibious, overloaded, the landing party can no longer fire from the loopholes (for complacency at least). And most importantly, why, if there are tanks in the army?
                  We are not Czechs, the country is big, there are no roads, there are many rivers, we don’t like to upgrade armored vehicles at all (unfortunately).
                  I would be limited to the “Arena”. And to teach the landing force to interact with it, so as not to go under shrapnel.


                  But you didn’t think that instead of floating shit it’s better to make a normal BMP and to buy the newest bridge and fortification equipment for the engineering troops and it’s just annoying that we don’t think about such parts and supply them retroactively. Understand here either the life of people or a floating coffin. Plus, do you even think about how much the arena for each BMP will cost? And how much such behi will weigh. Plus, how can infantry interact with such a machine? Do you know how kaz works? In fact, it will be tantamount to a grenade that explodes among the fighters. My opinion is that kaz should only be put on tanks. And on BMP and BTR screens.
                  1. zaitsev
                    zaitsev 24 May 2013 01: 00 New
                    +2
                    MILITARY want to swim in the TTZ in black and white, and the mass is up to 20 tons for infantry fighting vehicles.
                    The price of the Arena is not higher than the SLA of the tank, the weight is 1000 kg, but inefficient screens are not needed.
                    About DZ, Marshal Baghramyan also said, “I will not allow tanks to be laid with explosives !!” And Israel used DZ "Blazer" and DZ appeared with us.
                    We must learn to interact and not to whine. Do you think before the development of KAZ did not think about the landing? In the Soviet Socialist Republic there were Institutes of the Ministry of Defense, where specialists worked, no match for us ...
                  2. Rakti-kali
                    Rakti-kali 24 May 2013 10: 42 New
                    -1
                    Quote: Alexey Prikazchikov
                    And you didn’t think that instead of floating shit it’s better to make a normal bmp

                    And you did not think that the BMP is not a tank, and it is necessary to use it in accordance with the Charter?
                    1. Rakti-kali
                      Rakti-kali 24 May 2013 17: 26 New
                      0
                      Well, of course ... "click" on the minus is much easier than reading the Charter.
            2. Rakti-kali
              Rakti-kali 24 May 2013 10: 36 New
              0
              Quote: Alexey Prikazchikov
              And the quality should be tightened up with comfort, so take a look at what the Czechs muddied up to look at any expensive and compare how disgustingly our bmp and armored personnel carriers are made:

              For all kinds of exhibitions and salons, everything, including us, makes the technique as beautiful and high-quality as possible. The operation of the BTT usually very quickly removes all the gloss from it, and the active operation with participation in the database very quickly directly disfigures any BTT.
              By the way, my opinion is that the presented model of modernization of the BMP-2 is purely saloon, since the chassis of the BMP-2 itself does not significantly increase the protection (and therefore the mass) of the car. Thus, the presented sample will be incapacitated due to constant damage to the chassis, possibly transmission.
        3. roial
          roial 23 May 2013 23: 27 New
          +4
          Well, if you use it as a tank, then of course the grave will be fraternal, you need to clean the brains of the generals so that they use the equipment for the purpose, well, and sometimes they read the combat manual, it is written in blood.
          And so the car is normal.
    2. SergeySK
      SergeySK 23 May 2013 11: 38 New
      +4
      OlegYugan

      I wonder what kind of Syrian experience ?????

      What we did not know before Syria ?????
  5. Zheka Varangian
    Zheka Varangian 23 May 2013 11: 08 New
    +5
    http://topwar.ru/uploads/images/2013/158/lnoi787.jpg С ДЗ
    1. cyclist
      cyclist 23 May 2013 11: 20 New
      +3
      this option would add KAZ and there would be no price
      1. Zheka Varangian
        Zheka Varangian 23 May 2013 14: 06 New
        +5
        With kaz "Arena"
        1. roial
          roial 23 May 2013 23: 31 New
          +1
          And death to the landing. Can you imagine what will happen to the landing party that will accompany this vehicle?
          Or your generals, as always will use them without infantry cover ?? Then what's the point of this BMP ?? KAZ is generally a dead end branch of the development of BMP protection, our infantry is already riding from the top, and with KAZ in general it will bypass this BMP at a distance of a kilometer.
        2. zaitsev
          zaitsev 24 May 2013 00: 09 New
          0
          what the doctor ordered !!! and experience ...
      2. Phantom Revolution
        Phantom Revolution 23 May 2013 15: 19 New
        +2
        Can you imagine what KAZ is?



        Imagine if soldiers came out of an infantry fighting vehicle and an RPG flew into them, and now all the shrapnel is soldier. KAZ needs it purely away from the infantry.
        1. KoRSaR1
          KoRSaR1 23 May 2013 16: 15 New
          +2
          It is needed on tanks, infantry do not go near tanks. It will be sad if it does not work, and an RPG grenade + a charge with spent on the armor, it’s even scary to think ...
          1. Phantom Revolution
            Phantom Revolution 23 May 2013 19: 09 New
            0
            Of course, it was intended for tanks in essence.
            1. roial
              roial 23 May 2013 23: 38 New
              0
              Tanks must be accompanied by infantry, or a scribe will come to this tank very soon, remember the experience of the Great Patriotic War of the Chechen conflicts, how many videos are there to Syria where tanks without infantry cover become easy prey for an RPG-shnik, an RPG is not that expensive you can afford to plant a couple of grenades in the side of the tank and KAZ will not save from the second and even third grenades aboard.
          2. Rakti-kali
            Rakti-kali 24 May 2013 10: 49 New
            +1
            Quote: KoRSaR1
            It is needed on tanks, infantry do not go near tanks.

            Actually, it’s like walking. But you are right - the radius of the danger zone of KAZ "Arena" EMNIP is about 30 meters, and there is no particular need for infantry to get closer to the tank, infantry guard it at a distance of 50 - 150 meters in the conditions of the city, for the BMP and armored personnel carrier KAZ it makes no sense that these are just infantry vehicles.
            The best defense for an armored personnel carrier and infantry fighting vehicle, especially in urban conditions, is its motorized rifleman, standing above the corpse of an enemy grenade launcher shot by him.
        2. cyclist
          cyclist 23 May 2013 18: 39 New
          0
          Well, here we have in mind the revision of the KAZ itself, say against cluster munitions, or adjustable shells, ATGMs with the designation of the defense sector, let's say in the BMP protection zone safe for soldiers from above. And so the idea with KAZ Arena meant using on the march or on the offensive, where the infantry will act behind the BMP and not enter the defense sector, but apparently the implementation in practice was called into question
        3. zaitsev
          zaitsev 24 May 2013 00: 11 New
          0
          the landing is dismounted from behind, there are no KAZ blocks (on the back of the tower)
          And when KAZ is turned on, the alarm should be on (sound and light)
          1. roial
            roial 24 May 2013 00: 16 New
            0
            Well, what for such a KAZ that does not provide circular protection ??? and what kind of signaling are you talking about ??? What will he have time to react to the shot of the kaz ??? and find a secluded place so as not to fall under shrapnel?
            1. zaitsev
              zaitsev 24 May 2013 00: 30 New
              0
              the signal is triggered when the commander turned on the KAZ, and not when it is already firing
              1. roial
                roial 24 May 2013 00: 36 New
                0
                and the whole landing, like mice burrowing in holes in a sprinter-style style, wander away from this car, and what do we have? a car driving alone without infantry cover (two grenades on board and a grave for the crew) and the infantry of FIG knows at what distance from the BMP it cautiously looks in her direction so God forbid not to fall under shrapnel. What is the interaction here? What are they fighting?
            2. zaitsev
              zaitsev 24 May 2013 00: 33 New
              0
              and when shelling a regular BMP at an assault on the armor or near the chances of survival no more
              1. roial
                roial 24 May 2013 00: 40 New
                +2
                infantry must suppress tank-hazardous (or bmpasafe) targets, and infantry fighting vehicles must support infantry with fire, then the landing will be alive and the whole machine
                1. zaitsev
                  zaitsev 24 May 2013 01: 09 New
                  0
                  common truth
    2. Mista_dj
      Mista_dj 23 May 2013 12: 40 New
      +5
      Looks like a mother-in-law came from the village ...
      All in bags
  6. The comment was deleted.
  7. Geokingxnumx
    Geokingxnumx 23 May 2013 12: 44 New
    +3
    http://karelmilitary.livejournal.com/82925.html
    modernization of the BMP-1
  8. Mista_dj
    Mista_dj 23 May 2013 12: 54 New
    15
    It seems to me that the main efforts to protect the Russian infantry fighting vehicles should be directed not at the “30mm cannon in a circle”, but at resistance to being hit by anti-tank grenade launchers and detonating explosive bombs.
    Neither I nor my commanders were able to recall cases of BMP defeat as a result of shelling from 30mm guns, but about grenade launchers and roadside mines - there are no fingers to count.
    It is unlikely that with the existing BPM 3 - such protection will be possible.
    Here rather a new platform is needed.
    Yes, and the convenience of the landing - it would not hurt to add.
    And well, it would just be difficult to get out of the BMP 2/3 on the go.
    Who, after the blast, shell-shocked, tried to get out in winter gear, and after that they got the lads out of the "landing" - they will understand what I mean ...
    1. poizor
      poizor 23 May 2013 13: 48 New
      +5
      Quote: Mista_Dj
      Neither I nor my commanders were able to recall cases of BMP defeat as a result of shelling of 30mm guns

      and there was no great war, for which all armies were preparing.

      Quote: Mista_Dj
      about grenade launchers and roadside mines

      but the partisans have been opponents for more than 30 years. but unlike the Americans, who equipped their army with machines (armored humvees and MPMs) corresponding to these threats, neither the Soviet nor the Russian army solved this problem ...
      1. Black Colonel
        Black Colonel 23 May 2013 15: 57 New
        +1
        And what, “Abrams” are on fire, and “Hammie” are safe and sound? And the RPG doesn't take them! Fantasy!
        1. poizor
          poizor 23 May 2013 16: 17 New
          +4
          Do you want to compare the losses of the Americans and Iraq, against the army, and the losses of the Russian Federation in Chechnya against the partisans?

          Quote: Black Colonel
          And what, the "Abrams" are burning,

          burn, but due to the competent use of burned over the past 30 years, you can list on the fingers ...

          Quote: Black Colonel
          and “Hammy” intact, whole?

          after the introduction of MCI, losses from IEDs decreased by 90% !!! and we have? why suddenly began to book the Urals logs? UAZs to hang up with armor plates? Isn’t it that a couple of bursts from 300 meters on a body with drugs and tarpaulin protection are a couple of corpses?

          Quote: Black Colonel
          And the RPG doesn't take them!

          Lattices / nets have long been their standard in counter-guerrilla warfare ... and where are they with us?
          1. roial
            roial 23 May 2013 23: 41 New
            +1
            Well, maybe it’s not the technique that needs to be changed, but the generals and various other asterisks ???
            You look and there will be less losses?
    2. Black Colonel
      Black Colonel 23 May 2013 15: 53 New
      +1
      “Merkava” is more suitable for this - reliable protection, excellent armament, convenient escape if something happens (MTO at the front, landing landing at the back, like the BMP-1 (2). It just won’t enter the transport, and it’s as if afloat to be.
      1. roial
        roial 23 May 2013 23: 49 New
        +4
        You look at the tactics of the Jews, I have never seen how many videos involving Jewish Rarmia I have never seen their tanks work in the city, drive them to the outskirts and beat at the indicated points, the beters came in, the landing troops cleared the area and the carrots crawled on. And what’s going on in front of the APC is the infantry hiding behind it, and that you want a grenade in the side of the beter, a burning box and a bunch of corpses around, and "competent people" with a smart look discuss that they need an airborne landing from the stern.
        Read the combat charter. Landing of armored personnel carriers and infantry fighting vehicles is carried out to the frontier, equipment and people are defeated, then infantry goes in front and armored personnel carriers or infantry fighting vehicles from behind support infantry by fire (I apologize if I read a little not so long ago)
        1. Rakti-kali
          Rakti-kali 24 May 2013 10: 57 New
          +1
          Quote: roial
          Read the combat charter. Landing of armored personnel carriers and infantry fighting vehicles is carried out to the frontier, equipment and people are defeated, then infantry goes in front and armored personnel carriers or infantry fighting vehicles from behind support infantry by fire (I apologize if I read a little not so long ago)

          Everything is correct. I’ll add from myself - the main problem of the RF Armed Forces is that the requirements of the Charter are not fulfilled, both by rank-and-file fighters and junior commanders, and by senior and higher commanding personnel.
          1. ed1968
            ed1968 24 May 2013 13: 22 New
            0
            if the army doesn’t live according to the charter, but somehow what kind of efficiency can be discussed
  9. pamero
    pamero 23 May 2013 13: 17 New
    +7
    Very nice car! The MSA is wonderful, the calculator is lovely, the 100 mm gun is a beast (automatic loading system is reliable), the 30 mm gun is better than the 2 BMP, if all the electronics burn out everything works fine in the manual mode, the multi-fuel universal engine ride on gasoline, even on DZ fuel, kerosene, at least any bio fuel, even alcohol good , at least gas will go on everything. There is one BUT you need a technically trained well mechanic - the driver. good
    1. Black Colonel
      Black Colonel 23 May 2013 16: 05 New
      +4
      Today EVERYONE should be prepared FOR YOU with the entrusted equipment and could replace a comrade in battle. In Afghanistan, one tank mechanic rescued his own, driving the spirits out of the gun, and at that time the rest of the crew were looking for a passage, in my opinion, through a blockage on the road or something like that. But they didn’t perceive their spirits for the small, it’s good that the driver in the training for the gunner studied. It came in handy. As the most beloved grandfather of all time and peoples Lenin said, "Learn, study and study"
    2. Rakti-kali
      Rakti-kali 24 May 2013 10: 59 New
      0
      Quote: pamero
      There is one BUT you need a technically trained well mechanic - the driver.

      And a well-trained gunner is a gunner, otherwise you are worthless to the main caliber of this “cruiser”.
  10. Alexey M
    Alexey M 23 May 2013 13: 46 New
    +5
    The BMP is not a tank and you don’t need to make an armored dinosaur out of it. Here you need to redo the landing compartment so that you could easily get out on the go by covering the armor.
  11. Turik
    Turik 23 May 2013 13: 47 New
    +4
    I didn’t understand: is the USA going to dump all its “Bradley” for scrap or are the Jews refusing their “Narmeres”?

    The technique created in the 80s will be relevant until the mid-20s. And let the cars be better and more powerful than veterans. But if it will be a real war, and not the smacking of another “banana republic” by a hundred or two special forces, then the military will prefer reliable and easy-to-use machines.
    1. poizor
      poizor 23 May 2013 13: 52 New
      0
      Quote: Turik
      I didn’t understand: whether the USA is going to hand over all its “Bradley”

      and this including. in addition to constant upgrades and replacement with a technique more suitable for the current conflict.

      Quote: Turik
      Jews refuse their "Narmeri"?

      Well, as if Namer has a tank + reservation.
      and even longer. The T-72 has been in service for 40 years, and will remain in service for the next 20 years.
      Quote: Turik
      The technique created in the 80s will be relevant until the mid-20s.
  12. shamil
    shamil 23 May 2013 13: 48 New
    0
    send to Syria for field tests as a means of air defense
  13. Kars
    Kars 23 May 2013 14: 03 New
    +3
    The potential is certainly not exhausted, but the BMP-3 concept itself raises doubts. And to exchange electronics, new ammunition, it never hurts.
  14. Apollo
    Apollo 23 May 2013 14: 11 New
    +3
    Thunderstorm infantry !!!

  15. Vtel
    Vtel 23 May 2013 14: 55 New
    0
    The performance characteristics of the BMP-3:
    Combat weight, t - 18,7 + 2%
    Crew, pers. - 3
    Landing, people - 7
    Length with 100 mm gun forward, 7,2 m
    Width, m - 3,3 (across screens)
    Ground clearance, m - 0,19 - 0,51
    Full height, m ​​- 2,45 (for fixed parts of the tower)
    Armament:
    100 mm gun launcher 2A70,
    30-mm automatic gun 2А72
    machine guns - 3 x 7,62 mm
    Ammunition - 40 rounds to the gun 2A70,
    500 rounds for the 2A72 cannon (300 - with HE and OFZ shells, 200 - with BT shells)
    2000 rounds of machine gun ammunition
    4000 machine gun rounds in autonomous installations
    8 ATGM
    Engine: make - UTD-29
    type - 10-cylinder, diesel, liquid cooling power, hp - 450
    Transmission - hydromechanical with hydrostatic transmission in MP
    Suspension - torsion bar with hydraulic shock absorbers Caterpillar - with RMSh and rubberized treadmill
    Maximum speed, km / h - 70 by land forward, 20 back, 10 afloat
    Cruising on the highway for fuel, km - 600
    Gradeability, city. - 35
    The width of the pit, m - 2,72
    Wall height, m ​​- 0,8
    Depth of ford, m - floats

    It's time to send to Syria, that will show itself. Kill enemies save Russia and Syria and all Orthodox brothers!
    1. poizor
      poizor 23 May 2013 15: 03 New
      +2
      Quote: Vtel
      It's time to send to Syria, that will show itself.

      will burn in exactly the same way as the BMP-1 of the Syrian army.
      no wunderwaffle will help in crooked hands and bad heads - neither the T-72 nor the BMP-3.
      1. Black Colonel
        Black Colonel 23 May 2013 16: 33 New
        0
        Everything burns. It is necessary to competently work together with tanks and infantry. And if you scream SO, then paws up and "Kameraden, nicht schießen! Wir Ihre besten Freunde!"
        1. poizor
          poizor 23 May 2013 16: 41 New
          +2
          Quote: Black Colonel
          It is necessary to competently work together with tanks and infantry.

          in Syria this is not observed. and that’s why any prodigy is useless to them.

          Quote: Black Colonel
          And if you scream SO, then paws up and "Kameraden, nicht schießen! Wir Ihre besten Freunde!"

          this is what happens over and over again, when they are clogged up for combat training, and the stepwork begins, sweeping the parade ground, painting the curbs, leveling the snowdrifts, the “correct” sewing on of the biochannels ...
  16. Lighting
    Lighting 23 May 2013 14: 55 New
    +1
    No need for nothing is a semblance of BMP. Unless the output in the stern is done with a normal ramp.
  17. gregor6549
    gregor6549 23 May 2013 16: 12 New
    +4
    Not a specialist in armored vehicles, but at one time I heard from military experts of various levels that both the 1 infantry fighting vehicle and the 2 infantry fighting vehicle are “armored infantry graves” and that the old BTR70 and their modifications were much better than the BMP. I had to use the BMP and as KShM and PU automated systems of command and control on the battlefield. Also not the best chassis for this purpose. Tightness, you are sitting in a coffin, not to mention the feelings experienced when this "coffin" moves at high speed over very rough terrain. We have one "gay" decided to somehow ride on this miracle of technology and broke his spine. No longer riding. The rear doors are not a gift either. Heavy with. Especially if you need to manage them when the BMP is not on a flat horizontal surface. I emphasize that this is a personal opinion, a “shpak”, I could be wrong.
  18. Roll
    Roll 23 May 2013 17: 50 New
    -7
    recourse Generally BMP is a dead end branch in armored vehicles. A better combination of wheeled tanks and a vehicle for cross-country infantry. If infantry goes to the BMP on the roof, the BMP sometimes falls from the roofs, it is vulnerable to all types of small arms, why the BMP is necessary. Now in Russia there is no place to dig trenches, the century of trench wars is over. Now is the age of mobile groups and precision weapons. Armored cars, armored personnel carriers, ordinary jeeps with heavy machine guns are the most. Of course, a BMP for a very limited range of tasks will work, and therefore a small number of them must be available, but the main emphasis is on wheeled tanks.
    1. Setrac
      Setrac 23 May 2013 18: 08 New
      +3
      Quote: Rolm
      Now is the age of mobile groups and precision weapons.

      This is the fate of local conflicts. In a serious conflict, a front line is created and country X is cleared from one border to another.
      Quote: Rolm
      A better combination of wheeled tanks and a vehicle for cross-country infantry.

      They made wheeled tanks, a dead end branch, why step on the same rake twice?
      1. Roll
        Roll 23 May 2013 18: 21 New
        +1
        tongue Wheel tanks can have a dead end, but in France and especially in their elite foreign legion it is used to the full, with regard to the front and trenches, with modern high-precision and high-power artillery, the front line easily breaks almost anywhere and the rest of the units fall into the boiler. Amer is convincingly proved in Iraqi wars. They easily broke through the Iraqi defense anywhere. Only strengthen areas and cities can still hold on. Only mobile groups can fight in modern conditions with a comparable enemy.
        1. Setrac
          Setrac 23 May 2013 18: 30 New
          +1
          Quote: Rolm
          Wheel tanks we can have a dead end, but in France and especially in their elite foreign legion it is being used

          And whom did the French defeat? To go nuts legislators in the military!
  19. Roll
    Roll 23 May 2013 18: 27 New
    0
    belay Wheel tank, although it is weakly armored, it has excellent maneuverability, it has a powerful gun and a full crew. And then the time of wheeled tanks comes again, it’s not without reason that they want to make our tank fleet 50 by 50 and that’s right.
    1. Letnab
      Letnab 24 May 2013 09: 51 New
      0
      For the sake of interest, read the book "Notes of the Chechen General", there is a small review about wheeled vehicles, not in favor of this, ..
  20. gregor6549
    gregor6549 23 May 2013 20: 00 New
    +2
    I will add a couple more cents to the above. It’s not that the wheels will have such a machine, on tracks, on an air cushion or some other “gravitap”. All movers have their own pros and cons. The main thing is that it provides adequate mobility and protection of infantry from small arms fire and mines, an acceptable level of comfort for the crew and "riders, covering them with their fire and safe evacuation from a wrecked car under someone else's fire. Well, there are" eyes "and" ears "to It’s hardly advisable to assign such combat tasks with the enemy’s armored vehicles and airplanes. It will turn out again either the same T80, or Tunguska, or both in one bottle. for the infantry in this hybrid is unlikely to remain.
    In general, the pursuit of universality and omnivorousness has already led to sad results earlier.
  21. My address
    My address 23 May 2013 21: 01 New
    +2
    Old army joke 70's.
    Merikosy whistled documentation for a new Soviet attack aircraft. Made The result was a tractor. Disassembled, reassembled - tractor! For a long time toiled, they called the old intelligence officer, they ask, maybe the Russians misled them? He answers - no. Just this is the initial version. Gradually teach everything: fly, shoot, bomb.
    Modernization is good. But you need to know the limit of improvements when to move to a qualitatively new. For example, Jews cherish their infantry, for the protection of their infantry fighting vehicles are almost tanks.
  22. Okuscher
    Okuscher 23 May 2013 21: 03 New
    +2
    BMP as a species should stay. Because its main task is the delivery and support of infantry. Regarding security - what did you want to get? Protection like a tank - this is the tank. In my personal opinion, you should do something like this:
    1) Front engine - additional protection.
    2) The crew must be in a kind of capsule.
    3) Do not touch the weapon module, unless the number of ATGMs is increased, with different warheads.
    4) Protection against mines using the V-shaped bottom, 2nd floor, etc.
    5) Exit back-up the sash for protection during unloading.
    6) Protection to the maximum, you can probably put KAZ (they would have modified it to cover the object of protection as a dome), on the fly it will help anyone.
    7) Well, and it should be suitable for the Airborne. (Swim and land). soldier
  23. 77bor1973
    77bor1973 23 May 2013 21: 42 New
    +1
    In the Great Patriotic War, the tankers used to say about the T-34 “armor -... but our tanks are fast!”, You just have to look at the BMP-3 from a different angle and do not focus on booking, in terms of armament, price, operational qualities, very successful car.
  24. mark021105
    mark021105 23 May 2013 21: 54 New
    0
    Damn, who needs wheeled tanks ??? In the vastness of Russia, they are not particularly needed. This is for those who conduct colonial wars against the Papuans in warm countries.
  25. Mista_dj
    Mista_dj 23 May 2013 22: 15 New
    +3
    Quote: 77bor1973
    price, performance is a very successful car.

    How easy it all turns out: the car is rubbish, but it is very repairable.
    And tell you how the landing party, for some reason not inside the BMP, “blows” with an explosion !?
    And how many parts does the person divide !?
    What is the use of the BMP 3 multi-fuel engine and cool cannons when even the crew pisses on it !?
    When there are enough pairs of grenades thrown from the balcony of the neighboring house, which would completely disable the BPM.

    BMP 2/3 - not tenacious and does not protect anyone, that’s the problem.
    1. flanker7
      flanker7 23 May 2013 22: 54 New
      0
      And why "blow up" an infantry fighting vehicle with a landing party sitting on top? Just a few queues for "stripping", simpler and cheaper.
      Now, regarding security, etc.: BMP is primarily a means of delivering a military vehicle to a place, and secondly, it is supporting tanks in terms of finding and destroying tank dangerous targets. And this is not a fight with tanks.
      And about the complete destruction of the BMP with a pair of grenades, it's just a BLA-BLA ...
    2. roial
      roial 23 May 2013 23: 55 New
      +1
      Well, if you, as a commander, drove a BMP UNSECURED with an airborne landing under a house from the window of which a grenade will be thrown onto your roof, then you must drive the army with a broom. Read the charter. The landing party must dismount from the BMP and, under cover of the BMP, clean the house and only after that the same BMP must pass under the balcony of this house. because of such commanders, hundreds of children die, and they consider the equipment to be worthless.
    3. 77bor1973
      77bor1973 24 May 2013 00: 04 New
      0
      Even the tank crew will not be able to call themselves protected, and even the infantry and even more so, the Bradley is more protected, but it can’t stop sailing and can only be transported by a heavy Galaxy, also ten times more expensive than the M113.
  26. audentes
    audentes 23 May 2013 22: 45 New
    0
    Quote: Alexey Prikazchikov
    here's another clickable photo
    It should be fun burning so much plastic!
  27. sergey158-29
    sergey158-29 24 May 2013 00: 29 New
    +1
    BMP-3 machine is good at the time ... 90s, somewhere even revolutionary!
    primary "+"
    1) the impact power of the combat module (BM)
    2) omnivorous engine
    primary "-"
    1) the location of the landing
    2) the only BM - there is no choice depending on the application ...
    And the funniest thing, in all the recent regional conflicts in the Caucasus, the Russians move only on top of the armor, and what the heck is a goat button accordion? In my opinion, it is necessary to dance from here, creating a new platform, but not forgetting the positive developments !!!
  28. zaitsev
    zaitsev 24 May 2013 00: 43 New
    0
    with a weight limit of 20 tons (Mi-26), the only way to protect against RPGs and ATGMs is KAZ. It is not possible to provide survivability and "circular" protection from kinetic ammunition and anti-tank mines. Manipulations with the layout will not give a significant effect. Miracles do not happen, RPGs also do not create suckers.
  29. zaitsev
    zaitsev 24 May 2013 00: 47 New
    0
    "Bradley" exceeded 25 tons and still did not provide protection from 30mm and RPGs with a tandem warhead, and the grilles and grids were all the more ineffective (only a moral effect), and DZ is effective only when it is hit at an acute angle ....
  30. zaitsev
    zaitsev 24 May 2013 01: 08 New
    +1
    Heavy BMP / BTR are also needed - in tank battalions, on the tank chassis. and motorized rifles should be more mobile on light BMP / BTR and in general trucks. And engineering cars and jammers and helicopters and drones.
    BMP-3 is good for solving the problems for which it was created. The main thing is that it provides total superiority over analogues in firepower.
  31. Sochi
    Sochi 24 May 2013 11: 28 New
    +1
    I read the comments, for those who want a BMP you need a car with anti-shell armor, have grilles, DZ, KAZ, anti-aircraft guns, Four bottoms, with a V-shaped, doors to access the entire wall, satellite trencher, trailed pontoon ... well, what else Something.
    Any equipment is created for the task, and the BMP task is delivery to the battlefield and support, roughly speaking, it is a lightly armored and armed truck for soldiers. And there is no need to be proud of tanks from it, simply because tanks already exist ... Of course, modernization of the defense is needed, but within reasonable limits. More important is the radio communication inside the unit between all the fighters for more rapid target designation and interaction, so that any fighter from anywhere can give an indication to the BMP about the shelter, ask for support by fire ... Then the BMP's security will grow significantly.
    1. gregor6549
      gregor6549 24 May 2013 17: 04 New
      0
      The creators of the Australian "Bushmaster" went exactly this way. There, too, not everything is dancing with mine protection, but otherwise a very decent machine turned out with everything you need, including a heavy machine gun, but no frills. Yes, and in Afghanistan, she passed a rigorous battle test. And now, Australians are installing ASUV terminals on such machines, and on some compact reconnaissance equipment, i.e. each machine will be able to work on the network and exchange data with the horse, neighbors, infantry support equipment (aviation artillery, etc.) and even with each of its “passengers” after dismounting. T, e, the majority of “passengers”, in addition to protecting with armor and machine gun fire, also have the opportunity to know with the necessary and sufficient degree of detail what is happening on the battlefield in real time and what the passenger needs to do at any given time. And even if several vehicles are controlled after the landing, the landing without knowledge of the situation will not remain. But if they do it with the landing, then, of course, is another matter. On the other hand, why then for those who are bought, this knowledge. It seems as if extra. hi