BMP-3: Modernization potential not exhausted

Huge 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.

Comments

[cyclist]

excellent BMP, interesting sets with DZ are provided?

[orff]

there is a backlog - this is very good. OK. Good luck !!!

[Zheka Varangian]

S D.Z. BEAST MACHINE !!!!

[ultra]

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!

[DDW]

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 ...

[sscha]

I compare my BMP-1: earth and sky !!!
Modified engines?

[bask]

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.

[bask]

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.

[yanus]

BMP3 can be upgraded, but it was already made as a ready-made complex. You don’t especially go around in terms of security.
A new BMP must be made with an overpowering engine and an excessive strength of the frame. The armor, which is placed on the "base" model, must hold heavy machine guns, forehead - 30mm cannon. To this a set of additional removable armor - protection from 30mm guns in a circle. On top you can add an additional set of reactive armor + grilles. And under each theater of operations, "change clothes" BMP. It is necessary 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 wow 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.

[cyclist]

you can put the Arena KAZ on it, although the cost in this case will increase

[Nick]

Quote: cyclist

you can put on it KAZ "Arena"

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 ...

[Dmitry 2246]

Our misfortune is communications, sights, logistics, intelligence.

[trenitron]

Add from personal experience .... more crew security

[il grand casino]

It is necessary to modernize ... until the armature is completed

[Nick]

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 ...

[Nick]

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.

[il grand casino]

About heavy bmp and speech ... I am not a supporter of continuing to do bmp with the level of reservation that is available ...

[OlegYugan]

Beauty. THANKS
I hope the Syrian experience is taken into account.

[Nayhas]

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 ...

[Alexey Prikazchikov]

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.

[No_more]

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.

[Nayhas]

The question is not even in booking, but in the layout, getting out of the BMP-3 is very difficult, especially on the move or under fire, and if also in winter clothes ... The presence of two paratroopers with machine guns in front of the car is generally nonsense, to conduct aimed fire on the move from non-stabilized weapons it is impossible, landing through the hatch upwards is also not easy. The frontal projection is protected only by the body armor (in the BMP1 / 2, the protection was supplemented by the engine), and there are three people, if a shell hits them, they have no chance. So the term "mass grave" for the BMP-3 was fixed from the moment it entered the troops.

[No_more]

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.

[Explore]

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.

[IRBIS]

Quote: Nayhas

The frontal projection is protected only by the hull armor (in the BMP1 / 2, the protection was supplemented by the engine), and there are three people, if a shell hits there, they have no chance. So the term "mass grave" for the BMP-3 was fixed from the moment it entered 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.

[Nayhas]

The question is not about keeping the combat vehicle, but about the chances of the crew and the landing force to stay alive.

[Nick]

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.

[Nayhas]

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.

[IRBIS]

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.

[Alekseev]

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 the BMP-3, and there can be no chance "in the event of a shell hitting it" (and ) 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!
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.

[Nayhas]

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.

[Black Colonel]

Why not 14,5 mm?

[SergeySK]

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 Kurganets, you can safely say to yourself "Leave hope, everyone who enters 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! ! !

[Alexey Prikazchikov]

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:

[Alexey Prikazchikov]

here's another clickable photo

[Alexey Prikazchikov]

the rest is here http://otvaga2004.mybb.ru/viewtopic.php?id=663&p=29

Just appreciate how the whores work and how we are. But we have everything that has no analogues in the world.

[zaitsev]

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 "Arena". And the landing force should be trained to interact with her, so as not to climb under the shrapnel.

[Alexey Prikazchikov]

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 "Arena". And the landing force should be trained to interact with her, so as not to climb under the 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.

[zaitsev]

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 won't allow tanks to be surrounded by explosives !!" And Israel used the "Blazer" DZ and DZ appeared here.
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 ...

[Rakti-kali]

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?

[Rakti-kali]

Of course ... it is much easier to "click" on the minus than to read the Charter.

[Rakti-kali]

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.

[roial]

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.

[SergeySK]

OlegYugan

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

What we did not know before Syria ?????

[Zheka Varangian]

http://topwar.ru/uploads/images/2013/158/lnoi787.jpg С ДЗ

[cyclist]

this option would add KAZ and there would be no price

[Zheka Varangian]

S kaz "Arena"

[roial]

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.

[zaitsev]

what the doctor ordered !!! and experience ...

[Phantom Revolution]

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.

[KoRSaR1]

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 ...

[Phantom Revolution]

Of course, it was intended for tanks in essence.

[roial]

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.

[Rakti-kali]

Quote: KoRSaR1

It is needed on tanks, infantry do not go near tanks.

Actually, it still walks. But you are right - the radius of the dangerous zone of the KAZ "Arena" EMNIP is about 30 meters, and the infantry does not really need to come closer to the tank, the infantry guards it in the city at a distance of 50 - 150 meters, for IFVs and armored personnel carriers KAZ is meaningless, due to the fact 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.

[cyclist]

Well, here we mean the refinement of the KAZ itself, say against cluster munitions, or corrected projectiles, ATGM with the appointment of a protection sector, say, in a safe for soldiers protection zone of the BMP from above. And so the idea with the KAZ "Arena" implied use on the march or during the attack, where the infantry will operate behind the BMP and not enter the defense sector, but apparently the implementation in practice was questioned

[zaitsev]

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)

[roial]

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?

[zaitsev]

the signal is triggered when the commander turned on the KAZ, and not when it is already firing

[roial]

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?

[zaitsev]

and when shelling a regular BMP at an assault on the armor or near the chances of survival no more

[roial]

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

[zaitsev]

common truth

[Mista_dj]

Looks like a mother-in-law came from the village ...
All in bags

[Geokingxnumx]

http://karelmilitary.livejournal.com/82925.html
modernization of the BMP-1

[Mista_dj]

It seems to me that the main efforts to protect Russian infantry fighting vehicles should be directed not at the "30mm cannon in a circle", but at resistance to damage from anti-tank grenade launchers and detonation on land mines.
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.
Whoever, after the explosion, shell-shocked, tried to get out in winter equipment, and after that the lads from the "landing" to pull out - they will understand what I mean ...

[poizor]

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 ...

[Black Colonel]

And what, "Abrams" are on fire, and "Hammies" are safe and sound? And the RPG doesn't take them! Fantasy!

[poizor]

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, "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 "Hummy" intact, intact?

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?

[roial]

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?

[Black Colonel]

For this, the "Merkava" is more suitable - reliable protection, excellent weapons, convenient leaving in case of anything (MTO in front, landing exit at the rear, like in BMP-1 (2). It just won't enter transport, and it doesn't seem to be afloat) be. Pichalka!

[roial]

Look at the tactics of the Jews, how many videos with the participation of the Jewish army have I never seen have never seen that their tanks work in the city, they will drive them to the outskirts and, well, hammer at the indicated points, the beteers came and hung the troops, cleaned the area and the carrots crawled further. And what goes in front of the armored personnel carrier behind it, the infantry is 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 persons" are smartly discussing that the landing is needed 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)

[Rakti-kali]

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.

[ed1968]

if the army doesn’t live according to the charter, but somehow what kind of efficiency can be discussed

[pamero]

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 , at least gas will go on everything. There is one BUT you need a technically trained well mechanic - the driver.

[Black Colonel]

Today EVERYONE must be prepared for YOU with the entrusted equipment and could replace a comrade in battle. In Afghanistan, one tank mechanic rescued his own, dispersed the spirits from the cannon, while the rest of the crew were looking for a passage, in my opinion, through a blockage on the road or something like that. Here their spirits didn’t get caught up in the small, fortunately, that the mechanic in the training was a gunner. It was useful. As the most beloved grandfather of all times and peoples used to say, Lenin "Learn, learn and learn"

[Rakti-kali]

Quote: pamero

There is one BUT you need a technically trained well mechanic - the driver.

And a well-trained artilleryman is a gunner, otherwise the main caliber of this "cruiser" is worth a penny.

[Alexey M]

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.

[Turik]

I did not understand: is the United States going to give up all its "Bradleys" for scrap or are the Jews giving up their "Narmers"?

The technique created in the 80s will be relevant until the mid-20s. And let the cars be better and more powerful than the veterans. But if this will be a real war, and not the smirking of another "banana republic" by hundreds or two of special forces, then the military will prefer reliable and easy-to-use machines.

[poizor]

Quote: Turik

I don’t understand: the United States is going to hand over all its "Bradleys" for scrap

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

Quote: Turik

Jews refuse from their "Narmers"?

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.

[shamil]

send to Syria for field tests as a means of air defense

[Kars]

The potential is certainly not exhausted, but the BMP-3 concept itself raises doubts. And to exchange electronics, new ammunition, it never hurts.

[Apollo]

Thunderstorm infantry !!!

[Vtel]

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!

[poizor]

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.

[Black Colonel]

Everything is on fire. We need to competently work together with tanks and infantry. And if you shout SO, then the legs are up and "Kameraden, nicht schießen! Wir Ihre besten Freunde!"

[poizor]

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 shout SO, then the legs are up and "Kameraden, nicht schießen! Wir Ihre besten Freunde!"

this is how it happens over and over again, when they are hammered into combat training, and shagistika begins, sweeping the parade ground, painting curbs, leveling snowdrifts, "correct" sewing on birches ...

[Lighting]

No need for nothing is a semblance of BMP. Unless the output in the stern is done with a normal ramp.

[gregor6549]

Not a specialist in armored vehicles, but at one time I had to hear from military specialists of all levels that both BMP 1 and BMP 2 are "armored infantry graves" and that the old women BTR70 and their modifications were much better than BMP. I had to use the BMP and as KShM and PU of automated command and control systems on the battlefield. Also not the best chassis for this purpose. Tightness, you sit in a coffin, not to mention the sensations experienced when this "coffin" moves at high speed over very rough terrain. We have one "gyaroi" somehow decided to ride this miracle of technology and broke his spine. Didn't ride anymore. Rear doors are also not a gift. Heavy with. Especially if you need to handle them when the BMP is not on a flat horizontal surface. I emphasize, this is a personal opinion, "shpak", I could be wrong.

[Roll]

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.

[Setrac]

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?

[Roll]

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.

[Setrac]

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!

[Roll]

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.

[Letnab]

For the sake of interest, read the book "Notes of a Chechen General", there is a small review about wheeled vehicles, not in favor of it, ..

[gregor6549]

I will add a couple more kopecks to what was said earlier. The point is not whether there will be such a machine on wheels, on tracks, on an air cushion or other "gravity". All movers have their pros and cons. The main thing is that it provides proper mobility and protection of the infantry from small arms fire and mines, an acceptable level of comfort for the crew and riders, their cover with their own fire and safe evacuation from a wrecked vehicle under alien fire. Well, "eyes" and "ears" to But it is hardly advisable to assign the tasks of fire confrontation with armored vehicles and enemy aircraft to such vehicles. You will get either the same T80, or Tunguska, or both in one bottle. True, there are places for infantry in such vehicles. such a hybrid is unlikely to remain.
In general, the pursuit of universality and "omnivorousness" has already led to sad results

[My address]

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.

[Okuscher]

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).

[77bor1973]

In the Great Patriotic War, tankers had a saying about the T-34 "armor-x ... but our tanks are fast!", You just need to look at the BMP-3 from a different angle and not get hung up on booking, in terms of weapons, prices, performance very good car.

[mark021105]

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.

[Mista_dj]

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 to tell you how the landing force, sitting for some reason not inside the BMP, "blows away" 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.

[flanker7]

Why "blow up" an infantry fighting vehicle with a landing party sitting on top? A few queues are enough for "cleaning", easier 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 ...

[roial]

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.

[77bor1973]

Even the tank's crew will not be able to call themselves protected, and even the infantry, and even more so, the Bradley is more protected, but at the same time it stopped sailing and can only be transported by the heavy Galaxy, which is ten times more expensive than the M113.

[audentes]

Quote: Alexey Prikazchikov

here's another clickable photo

It should be fun burning so much plastic!

[sergey158-29]

BMP-3 machine is good at the time ... 90s, somewhere even revolutionary!
main "+"
1) the impact power of the combat module (BM)
2) omnivorous engine
main "-"
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 !!!

[zaitsev]

with a weight limit of 20 tons (carrying capacity of the Mi-26), the only way to protect against RPGs and ATGMs is KAZ. It is impossible to provide survivability and "all-round" protection against kinetic ammunition and anti-tank mines. Layout manipulation will not have a significant effect. Miracles do not happen, RPGs also do not create suckers.

[zaitsev]

"Bradley" exceeded 25 tons and still did not provide protection against 30mm and RPGs with a tandem warhead, and the grilles and nets are all the more ineffective (only moral effect), and DZ is effective only when hit at an acute angle ...

[zaitsev]

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.

[Sochi]

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.

[gregor6549]

This is the path taken by the creators of the Australian "Bushmaster". There, too, not everything is danced with mine protection, but otherwise a very decent machine turned out with everything you need, including a large-caliber machine gun, but no frills. Yes, and in Afghanistan, she passed a battle test not sickly. And now the Australians put ACCS terminals on such machines, and on some also compact technical means of reconnaissance, i.e. each machine will be able to work in the network and exchange data with the horse, neighbors, infantry support means (aviation artillery, etc.) and even with each of its "passengers" after dismounting. That is, the majority of "passengers", in addition to being protected by 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 moment of this time. And even if several vehicles are made after the landing, the landing will not remain without knowledge of the situation. Now, if ukontrapupyat with the landing, then, of course, another matter. On the other hand, why, then, to those who are opposed, this knowledge. It seems like they would be superfluous.