Military Review

The tests of the modernized version of the light tank for the airborne "Sprut-SD" began

73
The tests of the modernized version of the light tank for the airborne "Sprut-SD" began

The first photos of the Sprut-SD self-propelled anti-tank gun 2C25 with mounted dynamic armor screens appeared on the Internet. The design of the mounted armor is similar to the armored protection of the upgraded amphibious assault vehicles of the BMD-4M type.


Currently, the leadership of the Ministry of Defense of Russia and the Airborne Forces are preparing to incorporate development work on the modernization of this product into the state defense order, and Volgograd Machine-Building Company, meanwhile, has intensively engaged in the development of the relevant topic.

In addition to enhancing the booking, it is planned to unify the machine with the BMD-4М. As part of the modernization, in addition to unification with the BMD-4М on the engine, transmission and chassis, it is planned to install the latest electronics on the SPTP. Thus, the new self-propelled anti-tank gun will be equipped with a modern digital fire control system with more advanced sights, including thermal imaging, as well as software and hardware complex, allowing to include the object into a single tactical level control system.

The number required to purchase self-propelled anti-tank guns will be determined by the Ministry of Defense.

In the 90s of the last century, the Volgograd Tractor Plant was the developer and manufacturer of this specialty. The 2005-mm 125 mm self-propelled anti-tank gun 2-25 was adopted. Therefore, its modernization in the direction of unification with the new assault vehicle BMD-4М is planned to be carried out in Volgograd. Potential collaborators of this development work are Kurgan enterprises “Tractor plants” - OJSC “SKBM” and OJSC “Kurganmashzavod”, the developer and manufacturer of BMD-4М, respectively.
Originator:
http://www.military-informant.com/
73 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Chicot 1
    Chicot 1 22 August 2013 10: 36
    28
    Duc decide what it is, "Sprut-SD" - a light tank or all the same (maybe) an ACS? .. That's when you finally decide, then squeeze articles on the site ...
    1. avt
      avt 22 August 2013 10: 45
      +9
      Quote: Chicot 1
      Duc decide what it is, "Sprut-SD" - a light tank or is it (maybe) an ACS ?.

      Yeah ! God forbid it sticks to the Octopus it drove - a light tank! And they will drive a self-propelled gun in the tail and in the mane and shout - why did such a defenseless guano.
      1. Basileus
        Basileus 22 August 2013 11: 10
        +4
        So for that it is lightweight that it cannot work where MBT works. In my opinion, it’s better to call RT, all the more, there are all the prerequisites for this. Even the SLA, emnip, allows.
      2. Vadivak
        Vadivak 22 August 2013 11: 16
        +7
        Quote: avt
        And they will drive a self-propelled gun in the tail and in the mane and shout - why did such a defenseless guano.


        The creators tried to combine "a horse and a quivering doe", that is, neither an ACS nor a tank. The self-propelled guns can shoot from closed positions, the tank cannot. The tank is highly protected and can compete with an enemy tank in direct fire. "Octopus" is not able, another question is that it may not be a light tank, but - a self-propelled PT gun, then it turns out that cunning techies are trying to shove the military with their new, instead of the outdated "rapier" is already a self-propelled miracle, about any decent armor 2С25 speech cannot go. Therefore, confrontation with an enemy tank can only be from ambushes by the "shot-and-hide" method, but in this case, portable ATGMs are more profitable.
        1. eplewke
          eplewke 22 August 2013 11: 59
          +4
          I agree. ATGM right now they do, the need for such light tanks disappears. It’s easier to install ATGMs on a tiger, on the principle of a shot - forgot - disappeared.
          1. DEfindER
            DEfindER 22 August 2013 12: 25
            0
            Quote: eplewke
            ATGM right now they do, the need for such light tanks disappears. It’s easier to install ATGMs on a tiger, on the principle of a shot - forgot - disappeared.

            Still, I think that there is a sense in light tanks, with the development of various types of active defense and actually dynamic defense, the need for thick armor already disappears, you’ll have a modern DZ and Arena on this LT and it will fight the enemy’s MBT on an equal footing .. A tiger with such the kit just roll over.
            1. Sakmagon
              Sakmagon 22 August 2013 13: 51
              +2
              good
              Moreover, "not every" Tiger "will swim to the middle of the Dnieper ..."
              1. eplewke
                eplewke 22 August 2013 15: 33
                0
                I think the octopus is also not very swimming.
                1. Wedmak
                  Wedmak 22 August 2013 16: 03
                  +4
                  It’s quite a swimming. It can even shoot from the water.
                  1. Corsair
                    Corsair 23 August 2013 01: 59
                    0
                    Quote: Wedmak
                    It’s quite a swimming. It can even shoot from the water.


                    The need has long been ripe for equipping the Airborne Forces with airborne self-propelled guns ...
                    From the moment the ASU - 85 "left the scene", which was successful but was only dropped by the "landing" method, the paratroopers had practically only "Nona" from the "guns" ...
                2. Sakmagon
                  Sakmagon 22 August 2013 16: 06
                  +4
                  Quote: eplewke
                  I think the octopus is also not very swimming.

                  I beg your pardon, you think wrong. The movement is not due to the rewinding of the tracks, as on an IFV, but due to water cannons, which gives the 10 a / h afloat (this is like you are a light trot), + stability (and stability!), Can land with the crew on water with further float with the excitement of 3-5 points (with the excitement of 3 point !!! at sea !!! I aimed fire, I’ll be silent for rivers and lakes).
              2. Patriot8482
                Patriot8482 22 August 2013 18: 36
                +1
                Speaking of swimming) Octopus as far as I know floating.
            2. eplewke
              eplewke 22 August 2013 15: 30
              0
              Against these body kits, cumulative double charges and charges work well and fairly easily. Increase the speed of the projectile, and no arena will detect you ... For any action - there is a counteraction. But mobility and secrecy, here is the true defense ...
              1. Wedmak
                Wedmak 22 August 2013 16: 07
                -1
                Against these body kits, cumulative double charges and charges work well and fairly easily.

                We still need to get these charges. How much rustle did our "Vampires" make in Syria !?
                Increase the speed of the projectile, and no arena will detect you ...

                That is the problem. You can’t disperse the cumulative one, but the BPS in its modern form, in fact, reached the maximum speed.
                But mobility and secrecy, here is the true defense ...

                But not in urban combat ... where an anti-tank missile can fly from any gap.
            3. Siberian German
              Siberian German 23 August 2013 04: 55
              +1
              and let's hang 33 fur coats on you - you forgot that she should be landing
        2. Sakmagon
          Sakmagon 22 August 2013 13: 47
          +9
          cunning techies are trying to shove the military their new, instead of the aging "rapier" is already a self-propelled miracle

          The creators are trying to combine the "lightness" and mobility of the landing with the ability to resist the armored vehicles of a potential enemy (which does not land anywhere, but is "at home" and can use BT any degree of security).
          ... about any decent booking 2С25 we can’t talk ...

          By itself! No one in the world can land 50-ton objects yet.
          ... in this case, portable ATGMs are more profitable

          To begin with, I propose to try to move "in peacetime on a peaceful land" (that is, without mines and shelling, but over rough terrain) about 50-70 kilometers with a portable ATGM and everything attached to it, after continuing the comment.
          Yours faithfully,
          1. Aleks tv
            Aleks tv 22 August 2013 13: 58
            +3
            Quote: Sacmagon
            The creators are trying to combine the "lightness" and mobility of the landing force with the ability to withstand the armored vehicles of a potential enemy

            good
          2. Vadivak
            Vadivak 22 August 2013 14: 14
            +2
            Quote: Sacmagon
            "lightness" and mobility of the landing force with the possibility of opposing the armored vehicles of a potential enemy (which does not land anywhere, but is "at home" and can use BT of any degree of protection).


            The tank will sew this "lightness and mobility" right through
            Quote: Sacmagon
            To begin with, I propose to try to move "in peacetime on a peaceful land" (that is, without mines and shelling, but over rough terrain) about 50-70 kilometers with a portable ATGM

            Have you heard about UAZ? How is that option? http://savepic.ru/2715447.jpg
            1. Sakmagon
              Sakmagon 22 August 2013 15: 20
              +5
              Vadivak Tank will sew this "lightness and mobility" right through

              I AGREE completely! But, in addition to OB-tanks, there are light tanks, infantry fighting vehicles, armored personnel carriers and missile defense ... and the collision of paratrooper (air assault) units with enemy tank units in an open field (or in W-Tanks wink ) is obviously ... not in the presence of children ... Only in the rear of the enemy ITS tank formations and units are rarely used, and even if the enemy removes from the front (or does not send in time to the front) a tank brigade for my SPRUT company - DESANT COMPLETED THE TASK! And eternal glory to him ...
              Vadivak About UAZ heard? How is that option?

              Yes. Acceptable. Let me clarify the indicators (compared to SPRUT):
              - cross? - the procedure for overcoming water barriers? - protection of the crew from shrapnel-bullet and mine-explosive damage? - the amount of ammunition? - which ATGMs are used against infantry (especially on the defensive)? - the order of combat interaction with their units equipped with BMD and BTRD (especially on the offensive) - from here - the additional organization of the supply of spare parts (when everyone else is on the BMD base) and fuel (when everyone else is on diesel fuel)? - and reading and reading ...
              With sincere respect for the opinion of the opponent ...
              1. eplewke
                eplewke 22 August 2013 15: 44
                0
                30 mm this light tank will also be well sewn. Modern 30 mm guns with such a rate of fire all BAZ from tanks lick, plus cameras and optics. I’m silent about LT. Then it’s better not 125 mm. put a gun on a light tank, and do something like a terminator for suppression fire with ATGMs on board. Behind the rear and against the infantry, and against the BMP, and against the Fortified positions, and anti-tank systems against tanks. There is mobility, there is no problem for waterfowl to make it, the main thing is that the ammunition was good ...
            2. dustycat
              dustycat 22 August 2013 15: 21
              0
              Quote: Vadivak
              Have you heard about UAZ? How is that option? http://savepic.ru/2715447.jpg

              Is it with a spring front suspension?
              Take an interest in how often the longitudinal traction in it breaks off-road.
              Not an option.
              The only UAZ plus is that after being blown up on anti-personnel bridges, they will still be usable (domestic production).
              Minus - no booking at all - no cab or dvigla.
              Not, of course, UAZ as a blank for an armored car is a suitable thing.
              But the tanks under the bottom ?!
        3. Yemelya
          Yemelya 22 August 2013 21: 13
          0
          Quote: Vadivak
          The creators tried to combine "a horse and a quivering doe", that is, neither an ACS nor a tank. The self-propelled guns can shoot from closed positions, the tank cannot. The tank is highly protected and can compete with an enemy tank in direct fire. "Octopus" is not able, another question is that it may not be a light tank, but - a self-propelled PT gun, then it turns out that cunning techies are trying to shove the military with their new, instead of the outdated "rapier" is already a self-propelled miracle, about any decent armor 2С25 speech cannot go.


          So the self-propelled PT gun is the self-propelled gun. By booking it is equivalent (slightly superior) to the rest of the Airborne Forces

          Quote: Vadivak
          Therefore, confrontation with an enemy tank can only be from ambushes by the "shot-and-hide" method, but in this case, portable ATGMs are more profitable.


          The Airborne Forces is armed with an ATGM based on the BTR-D - "Robot"

          You can't live with portable ATGMs alone. At the ground forces "Chrysanthemum".
        4. Andrey Yuryevich
          Andrey Yuryevich 23 August 2013 04: 50
          +3
          why bicker? not a bad landing machine, it quickly drives, swims, a powerful cannon, it even drops into the air from the air .... why should you pour mud in advance, then why not see it? hi
      3. Chicot 1
        Chicot 1 22 August 2013 11: 57
        +3
        Quote: avt
        they will drive a self-propelled gun in the tail and in the mane and scream - why did such defenseless guano

        Not in the eyebrow, but in the eye! .. good
      4. S-200
        S-200 22 August 2013 12: 58
        +1
        Quote: avt
        Yeah ! God forbid it sticks to the Octopus it drove - a light tank! And they will drive a self-propelled gun in the tail and in the mane and shout - why did such a defenseless guano.

        the operation of this product in the troops will take place in accordance with the TU and regardless of the opinion of the "military experts" who write articles and members of the forum ... discussing them. laughing
        1. avt
          avt 22 August 2013 16: 10
          +1
          Quote: S-200
          the operation of this product in the troops will take place in accordance with the TU and regardless of the opinion of the "military experts" who write articles and members of the forum ... discussing them.

          Yeah, you do according to the charter, you win honor and glory. Only in life it always turns out differently, that's just what is at hand and it’s good when you have a larger caliber at that moment and beats away, and you can swim pants without soaking.
      5. Pimply
        Pimply 22 August 2013 19: 09
        +2
        The worst thing is if they begin to use it as a tank. And then the biggest trouble will come.
        1. Sakmagon
          Sakmagon 23 August 2013 08: 06
          0
          Quote: Pimply
          The worst thing is if they begin to use it as a tank ...

          Nah! The worst - if, like a battleship - is floating after all, and there is a gun!


          PS "The main thing is to crow, but don't dawn there though!"?
    2. PROXOR
      PROXOR 22 August 2013 10: 46
      11
      Quote: Chicot 1
      Duc decide what it is, "Sprut-SD" - a light tank or all the same (maybe) an ACS? .. That's when you finally decide, then squeeze articles on the site ...

      Tank destroyer)))) So it will be more logical.
      1. Butya
        Butya 22 August 2013 12: 19
        +2
        Not only more logical, but also correct (judging by its description).
        In general, it is now necessary to carry out a deep reform of the Airborne Forces (and not only), since the conditions of the modern war have changed somewhat, and if we pull ... Well, I think everyone remembers the Crimean War ...
    3. Civil
      Civil 22 August 2013 11: 08
      +4
      Self-propelled gun, where is the tank from?
      1. Basileus
        Basileus 22 August 2013 11: 16
        0
        Well, the Americans called a similar machine XM1202 a tank.
        1. Chicot 1
          Chicot 1 22 August 2013 12: 02
          +1
          Quote: Basileus
          Well, the Americans called a similar machine XM1202 a tank.

          The Americans, even though on their ears, go backwards. This is entirely their own sexual difficulties. And here we are talking about the domestic model of the light tracked BTT. Moreover, the airborne and parachute-assisted landing ...
          And accuracy in definitions, it is always needed. Otherwise, the mess begins ...
    4. Garysit
      Garysit 22 August 2013 11: 24
      +4
      2C25 was originally designed as a means of combating enemy tanks was tested at the Rzhev training ground in the late 90s ...
    5. Beibit
      Beibit 22 August 2013 15: 06
      -8
      something I didn’t understand. Since when did the airborne troops become artillerymen. They will only fight with tanks. I think BMD-4m is just the way for them. And someone is shoving this gun.
      1. smiths xnumx
        smiths xnumx 22 August 2013 15: 19
        +2
        Salam alaikum dear Beibit. To begin with, any Russian airborne division includes an artillery regiment:
        The structure of the division is as follows (option):
        management (headquarters)
        two regiments, three battalions each
        artillery regiment
        anti-aircraft missile regiment
        engineering battalion
        communications battalion
        repair battalion
        logistics battalion
        reconnaissance company
        medical team

        http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C2%EE%E7%E4%F3%F8%ED%EE-%E4%E5%F1%E0%ED%F2%ED%FB%E


        5_%E2%EE%E9%F1%EA%E0_%D0%EE%F1%F1%E8%E8

        The artillery regiment of the VDD includes:
        1.Buy AR
        2.SADN (18 units) - 18 units of 120-mm SAO 2S9 "Nona-S"
        3. GADN (12 units) - 12 units of 12 122-mm towed howitzers D-30
        4.PTB (9 units) - 9 units of BTR-RD "Robot" with ATGM "Konkurs"
        Yours! hi
        Here is the 122-mm howitzer D-30, prepared for landing from an airplane

        Here it is on the trailer of an armored personnel carrier BTR-D
      2. Aleks tv
        Aleks tv 22 August 2013 15: 23
        +1
        Quote: Beibit
        since when did airborne troops become artillerymen.

        And ACS-57, ACS-85?
        What about Nona?
        They were always in the Airborne Forces.

        Look at the organizational structure of the ICP and the VDP, there are a lot of things.
        1. smiths xnumx
          smiths xnumx 22 August 2013 15: 33
          +1
          Dear Alexey, the serial production of the ASU-57 was carried out in 1950-1962, and the ASU-85 in 1959-1966 and they were OFFICIALLY withdrawn from service in 1993. Although I admit the idea that they are still available at the storage bases of armored vehicles.
          As the parachute airborne regiments were reequipped in the 1970s with new BMD-1 airborne infantry fighting vehicles, which provided anti-tank defense and fire support up to the squad level, ASU-57 regimental batteries gradually disbanded. The ASU-57 was finally withdrawn from service in the mid-1980s. After removal from service, part of the ASU-57 was used as training vehicles, and part was converted into unarmed tractors. Nevertheless, according to some Western sources, for 1996 the Russian Airborne Forces still claimed the presence of some ASU-57, as well as the SU-85, and according to the Military Balance IISS reference book, these self-propelled guns were also available for 2010 year - although at least about the SU-85 it is reliably known that it was withdrawn from service, along with many other obsolete weapons, in 1993.

          http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C0%D1%D3-57

          The only country in which the ASU-57 is possibly in service is the DPRK, which ordered in 1966 and received 1967 ASU-1968 removed from the armament of the USSR in 200-57. Yours faithfully! hi
          ACS-57

          ACS-85
          1. Aleks tv
            Aleks tv 22 August 2013 16: 15
            +2
            Quote: Kuznetsov 1977
            serial production of ACS-57 was carried out in 1950 — 1962 years, and ACS-85 in 1959 — 1966 years

            Roman, this meant that artillery has long been registered in the structure of the Airborne Forces.
            Thank you for the detailed commentary on the artillery regiment of the VDD, I had to refer to it, and not the VDP, DShP.
            hi
            1. smiths xnumx
              smiths xnumx 22 August 2013 16: 41
              +1
              No question, Alexei, always happy to help. Yours faithfully! hi
            2. Sakmagon
              Sakmagon 23 August 2013 08: 20
              0
              In general, a mustache is correct, you sprinkle ash on your head early.
              In any paratrooper (airborne assault) regiment (and now - the VDBr or DShBr) there is an artillery battalion, self-propelled - on the NONA, or howitzer - on the D-30, plus an anti-tractor division (or battery), plus in each battalion (PD or ДС) - mortar (or ПТ) battery. Axis so!
    6. ildar335
      ildar335 22 August 2013 19: 11
      -1
      yes do not give a shit, the main machine is like a zae ... b!
    7. alone
      alone 22 August 2013 21: 09
      0
      Octopus-sd designed as a sau. is it really difficult in Russia to design a light tank for the Airborne Forces? how many do not hang screen sheets and DZ, sau there is sau !! you can’t argue with that!
      given the characteristics of the airborne, it would be better if the octopus-sd would be left as a sau.
  2. Jacob31
    Jacob31 22 August 2013 10: 39
    +6
    Yes, for the Airborne Forces it is a good machine to support fighters, but they would not be delayed with entering the troops. And so the news is great))))
  3. Denis
    Denis 22 August 2013 10: 43
    +4
    Renault Logan??? wink (a photo)
    1. Chicot 1
      Chicot 1 22 August 2013 10: 47
      +3
      And by the way, a good advertisement for the French. Where else would you see this? .. wink
      And for good - a mess! .. am
    2. Wedmak
      Wedmak 22 August 2013 10: 47
      +2
      Yes, yes ... the tank is being transformed into Renault Logan in order to disguise. Renault Corporation is not opposed. wink
      1. strange and pretty meaningless
        strange and pretty meaningless 22 August 2013 13: 00
        0
        Why ... I would take it on credit. "Octopus" I mean. In my opinion, this is more promising in the foreseeable future than Logan. Although ... Better, probably beter. It is necessary to somehow prepare for the future "rise from his knees."
  4. Retx
    Retx 22 August 2013 10: 45
    +2
    Please change the photo, otherwise people will laugh!
    1. The comment was deleted.
  5. ivshubarin
    ivshubarin 22 August 2013 11: 01
    0
    They write that this is Photoshop
    1. Apollo
      Apollo 22 August 2013 11: 19
      +7
      greetings to all hi

      video footage and answers to all questions

      1. silver_roman
        silver_roman 22 August 2013 11: 56
        0
        the stuff is good. possibly based on a new platform being developed at this time, and a similar approach will be used. This is an assumption of why the MO and the General Staff are in no hurry with orders for Octopus-SD.
        In general, the car is very interesting.
        If the price is also reasonable, then there is a reason to think about further manning in combat units of the RF Armed Forces.
      2. smiths xnumx
        smiths xnumx 22 August 2013 12: 08
        +6
        Salam aleikum, respected Apollo. You can pour a lot of dirt and discuss the weak armor of the SAO 2S25 "Sprut-SD, but let's look at the largest airborne forces in the world:
        The same Americans created the M-24 Chaffee for the Airborne Forces, then the M-41 Walker Bulldog, when they realized that these tanks were too heavy. The M-551 Sheridan, when it was outdated, they more precisely understood that its 152-mm cannon-launcher Since the program failed, the M-8 Sheridan was in service until the mid-551s, until it was replaced by various modifications of the Stryker. And this is not counting the numerous armored "Hummers" with ATGM, AGS and heavy machine guns. ”Light 90-mm howitzers M-155 and MLRS M777 HIMARS were specially created for the Airborne Forces.

        his unlucky successor XM-8

        For the Airborne Forces and reconnaissance and airborne units, the British first created the Scorpion light tank with a 76-mm cannon, then replaced it with a Fox wheeled armored vehicle with a 30-mm cannon, and now they use the Saber, a hybrid tracked chassis, for fire support. "Scorpion" and "Fox" towers, and this is not counting the armed and transport "Land Rovers" and 105-mm howitzers L-119.
        The French, realizing that their "wheeled tank" AMX-10RC with a 105-mm cannon, could not be too heavy to be transported by air transport aircraft C-130 "Hercules", were forced to adopt the ERC export vehicle for their airmobile troops and parachute units of the Foreign Legion -90S "Sazhe" with a 90-mm cannon, lighter in weight. Plus a light armored vehicle VBL, used as a carrier of heavy infantry weapons.
        The Chinese have created their own BMD-ZBD03, with "Bakhcha-U", plus numerous Chinese copies of "Hummers", with 107-mm MLRS, Chinese copies of "Vasilka" and ZU-23, plus Chinese copies of the D-30 (type 85), 107 -mm MLRS type-74, self-propelled on a light truck and towed type 63.
        In Germany, a specialized BM (combat landing vehicle) "Wiesel", plus a specialized "Kraka", was created.
        That is, all of the above countries are armed with specialized samples of airborne weapons, intended for transfer on transport aircraft and helicopters. Currently, none of the above countries has a vehicle capable of withstanding the firepower of the "Octopus", the Chinese ZBD03 is compensated by our BMD-4. Yours faithfully! hi
        1. smiths xnumx
          smiths xnumx 22 August 2013 12: 18
          +1
          Sorry, not all photos are included:
          English "Saber"

          French ERC-90S "Sage"

          Chinese BMD ZBD03 with a 30-mm cannon and ATGM "Red Arrow 73" (a copy of our "Baby"), prepared for landing. The photo is clickable.

          Well now all. Yours faithfully! hi
          1. smiths xnumx
            smiths xnumx 22 August 2013 13: 21
            +3
            Wildly sorry, here is a photo of the XM-8 with dynamic protection.
            1. Ivan_Ivanov
              Ivan_Ivanov 22 August 2013 14: 06
              +1
              Why did the XM-8 fail?
              1. smiths xnumx
                smiths xnumx 22 August 2013 14: 23
                +4
                Dear Ivan_Ivanov Tank XM8, was created on the basis of the prototype CCLV in 1992, and was declared the winner of the AGS armored vehicle competition. By the end of 1994, six experimental tanks had been manufactured. These tanks, the Americans planned to replace the M-551 "Sheridan" when it was outdated, or rather, when they realized that its 152-mm cannon-launcher was useless (the low muzzle velocity due to the short barrel caused low accuracy, and created for the tank ATGM "Shilleila" launched through the barrel had too low armor penetration). There were three levels of tank armor. The first level of protection is similar to that of the Bradley BMP (armor is resistant to bullets with a caliber of up to 14,5 mm), the combat weight of the tank is 16 700 kg. Protection of the second level in the frontal projection is resistant to hitting 30-mm shells, the mass of the tank is 19 kg. Armor of the third level protects the crew from direct hits from RPG-960 grenades, the mass of such a tank is 7 kg. For the M23 tank, the Waterflight Arsenal created a 600 mm M8 cannon with an automatic loader. The US Army planned to order 105 M 35 tanks to equip one battalion of the 237nd Airborne Division and three armored cavalry battalions, the signing of the contract was scheduled for the end of 8, then the ceremony was postponed until mid-82, and at the end of 1995 the procurement program was canceled due to cuts in defense spending. The only more or less modern light tank that the Americans have recently been able to sell is the Stingray in 1996-1996, developed on its own initiative by Cadillac Gage Textron, which lost the M-1983 in the competition for an AGS armored vehicle. The main armament is the 1984-mm rifled L8A105 gun (a modernized version of the M7 Abrams tank gun, equipped with a muzzle brake, new recoil devices and a cradle and a modified ejector - all this made it possible to halve the recoil force acting on the trunnions when fired). year, Thailand purchased 3 tanks, the total contract value was about $ 1 million. Yours faithfully! hi
                Tank "Stingray"
                1. Ivan_Ivanov
                  Ivan_Ivanov 22 August 2013 14: 40
                  +1
                  Thank! Exhaustive ...
                  1. smiths xnumx
                    smiths xnumx 22 August 2013 14: 46
                    +4
                    Nothing to contact yet, always happy to help. Good bye! Yours faithfully! hi
        2. Ivan_Ivanov
          Ivan_Ivanov 22 August 2013 14: 00
          +2
          Currently, none of the above countries have a vehicle capable of withstanding the firepower of the "Octopus"

          Golden words! good
          I’ll add from myself: Not only can I resist, but at least somehow equal myself, or simply cannot reach out to firepower, mobility, and security. Octopus simply has nothing to compare.
      3. S-200
        S-200 22 August 2013 13: 09
        +1
        woman tassel gun barrel paint!?!? .... wassat it is irrational to use a spray gun in the workshop ??
    2. Retx
      Retx 22 August 2013 11: 21
      0
      this is photoshop hi
  6. Aleks tv
    Aleks tv 22 August 2013 11: 27
    +7
    2С25 unique machine.
    Floating, airborne (even in a "cow"), airborne combat vehicle with a full-fledged tank gun under bulletproof armor.
    She has her own niche in combat use.

    .with mounted dynamic armor mounted screens. .
    What is the installation method?
    Are its unique features lost at the same time?

    If they are lost, but installation and removal are possible in the field, then this is also good.
    Then, when performing tasks unusual for her functions (in the ground forces during ground operations), she will be most protected.
    We get a peculiar constructor of variable protection.

    Good luck, you Octopus!

    ps The photo is incomprehensible, the feeling that the tower is glued to the body ...
  7. Bort radist
    Bort radist 22 August 2013 11: 39
    +2
    Octopus SD with some details.
    1. igordok
      igordok 22 August 2013 13: 19
      +1
      Quote: Bort Radist
      Octopus SD with some "details".
      soldier
  8. USNik
    USNik 22 August 2013 11: 40
    +2
    Bggg, the photo shows the moment of the Octopus reloading from the trailer to the trunk of Renault laughing
  9. RUS-36
    RUS-36 22 August 2013 12: 02
    +4
    Normal apparatus, time will judge what is and how. And in the Airborne Forces, he certainly will not be superfluous.
  10. chenia
    chenia 22 August 2013 12: 26
    +3
    Good system, and has a place to be. As a reserve, the reserve is certainly better than towed guns (better protection, floating, the possibility of self-digging).

    It’s very suitable for the Airborne Forces (a very universal system), it can be used as a tank, as a weapon for firing with ZOMP (decent caliber), and naturally as a PT gun.

    It is only necessary to remember why the Airborne Forces are needed, and it is impossible to break through a sufficiently fortified, advance defense of the enemy.
  11. Tuzik
    Tuzik 22 August 2013 12: 58
    +1
    the armor is bulletproof, knowing how half-burned propellant charges in tanks burn, from dshk to the side stern, incendiary bullets will not set fire to it? Of RPG for sure. it would be better if the 57-mm art ship installation a220 delivered with birds. both in the air and in the infantry it’s excellent, but in the tanks with birds, and because of the shelter
  12. dvvv
    dvvv 22 August 2013 13: 14
    +1
    yeah ... good news .. that's just BMD4 this year will produce 2 pcs ...
  13. kapitan281271
    kapitan281271 22 August 2013 13: 54
    +4
    I don’t understand anything in the tactics of the general battle, but men, think mine is a worthwhile thing. Marine Corps, ramps open and a 125-mm caliber comes out on shore with an armored personnel carrier. Then both Chechnya and Agan showed how they used tanks in the mountains at the checkpoints as a long arm surrounded by concrete blocks, so they began to haul 50 tons of horseradish into the mountains, then they still lined with concrete anyway. Remember the fate of the IL-2 and Su-25 military and then did not know what to do with these birds. Further development showed that.
  14. max702
    max702 22 August 2013 13: 57
    +1
    Already wrote here, on Courage, the landing party discussed this "object" and came to the conclusion that it is not needed, a very narrow niche of using only enemy tanks, in all other cases, the use of a tank gun and ammunition is irrational (expensive, difficult, short-lived, the impossibility of shooting from closed positions, small angles of fire), in the tactics of using the Airborne Forces, the anti-tank capabilities of the 100mm BMD4 cannon are quite enough, and other anti-tank weapons that are in service with the Airborne Forces, they asked which tank or NONA is more needed? the answer was a tank but with a gun from NONA! that's all, the tank is now first of all a PTO, and not a means of supporting an infantryman, and I am absolutely sure that if a HE shell hits a tank from a 100mm gun, especially a 120mm tank will be incapacitated, the crew may survive, but do it the combat mission will definitely not be able to, shelling was carried out from a 30mm cannon of a tank with a 1.5 km burst of 15-20 shells Duc there was not a single whole device left on the tank, everything was swept away under a clean one, the barrel was pierced in several places, but the armor was not pierced, but the tank was disabled that he is that he is not ..
    1. Ivan_Ivanov
      Ivan_Ivanov 22 August 2013 16: 25
      +1
      ... on Courage, the landing party discussed this "object" and came to the conclusion ...

  15. Vtel
    Vtel 22 August 2013 14: 22
    +3
    Let it be and you can wet the tanks, if you shoot the first one and go fishing.

    TTX self-propelled anti-tank gun 2S25 "Sprut-SD":
    Combat weight, t 18
    Main dimensions, m:
    length (with gun) 7,07 (9,771)
    width 3,152
    height (with wind sensor) 2,72 (2,98)
    Maximum speed km / h:
    on the highway to 70
    on the ground up to 49
    afloat up to 10
    Power reserve, km 500
    Reservation Bulletproof
    Aiming range, m 4000
    Smoke screening device TDA, 6x902V "Tucha"
    Crew, people. 3
  16. Iraclius
    Iraclius 22 August 2013 14: 23
    0
    Half a century of the development of domestic tank building took to develop the concept of MBT and now here again we return to light tanks. request
    1. Basileus
      Basileus 22 August 2013 14: 33
      0
      This concept came to us from the West, which never could into heavy tanks. And ours, having worked out the tactics of application and, most importantly, building the world's best heavy tanks, were forced to abandon them only because of Khrushchev’s Wishlist.

      And light tanks didn’t go anywhere - there were always cars that performed their functions.
      1. Wedmak
        Wedmak 22 August 2013 14: 43
        0
        This concept came to us from the West, which never could into heavy tanks.

        There are still heavy tanks in the West. To call the same Abrams MBT language does not turn.
        And ours, having worked out the tactics of application and, most importantly, building the world's best heavy tanks, were forced to abandon them only because of Khrushchev’s Wishlist.

        Oh oh The last heavy tank, as I recall, was the T-10. So, a further increase in armor would lead to the path of Abrams - huge, heavy, slow. Not a single bridge or pontoon can stand it. And remember, where was the theater of operations predicted after the Second World War? Europe ... And what is Europe - a bunch of rivers, streams, swamps, hills, forests and other natural barriers. Where the heavy tank just gets bogged down.
        1. Basileus
          Basileus 22 August 2013 17: 05
          0
          Only bad luck - in terms of dynamics, the "heavy" Abrams makes the "average" T-72 as a standing one. So Abrasha is the most MBT, but a high mass. these are the costs of the Western school.

          But about the Soviet TTs of the last competition, take an interest in the Internet - about.770 was even recommended for adoption. Moreover, note that these Soviet TTs with assa, only slightly exceeding the mass of Western CTs, had simply exorbitant characteristics.
          1. Wedmak
            Wedmak 22 August 2013 17: 16
            +1
            Only bad luck - in terms of dynamics, the "heavy" Abrams makes the "average" T-72 as a standing one.

            Does? Their dynamic characteristics are approximately equal. And all because of the engines. Put on the T-72 1500 horses, so he will not only jump, he will do back flips.
            about.770 was even recommended for adoption.

            Recommended then maybe it was. But really the last in the troops was the T-10 and the IS-4. Both of them were transported to the Far East and turned into bunkers.
            1. Basileus
              Basileus 22 August 2013 20: 39
              0
              As far as I remember, Abrams accelerates to a hundred three times faster, and rides faster backwards, which is important for a combat vehicle. So the point is not only in the mass and engine, but also in the transmission.

              They didn’t take it as an thanks to Nikita Sergeich. The military were crazy about cars. These tanks, by the way, also exceeded the average dynamics.
      2. mazdie
        mazdie 22 August 2013 22: 00
        0
        The USSR first introduced the concept of a main battle tank!
    2. Ivan_Ivanov
      Ivan_Ivanov 22 August 2013 14: 42
      +3
      This is not a light tank.

      This is an SPG.
  17. Tan4ik
    Tan4ik 22 August 2013 17: 20
    0
    Wow handsome. To school would ride on this.
  18. rudolff
    rudolff 22 August 2013 17: 32
    +3
    Perhaps the Marine Corps Octopus would be more in demand than in the Airborne. Paired with BMP-3f.
  19. asbaev
    asbaev 22 August 2013 17: 59
    0
    Interesting car
  20. Mr. Truth
    Mr. Truth 22 August 2013 18: 07
    +1
    I wonder if he can withstand 2a82.
    A light tank is needed, an airborne assault with tanks with 125 mm caliber is a strong trump card.
    Each airborne division needs 1-2 light tank battalions.
    1. castle
      castle 22 August 2013 22: 23
      -4
      You will first fly to the landing site, and only then trump. This is not 1968 for you in a fraternal republic. And even then, only the landing method of the USSR Airborne Forces and Soviet specialists worked for us. And you yourself try to remember when these "blue" berets massively entered the battle from the "sky"? And what were the results? I hope you know why all over the world, except for the former Soviet ones, airborne units have berets of the color of blood?
  21. aud13
    aud13 22 August 2013 21: 14
    0
    The video showed that when shooting from a place, Octopus rolled back no less than a meter.
    Tell me who in the subject, is it really impossible to make a muzzle brake on this gun?
  22. sergey158-29
    sergey158-29 22 August 2013 23: 40
    0
    What is it for, lightly armored, "floating TANK" - I don't understand ... request
  23. Mr. Truth
    Mr. Truth 23 August 2013 13: 57
    0
    Quote: hrad
    This is not 1968 in the fraternal republic.

    The Czechs remember the year 68 and the 45th did not want to at least kill.
  24. Mr. Truth
    Mr. Truth 23 August 2013 18: 21
    0
    As the photo turned out to be Photoshop. The author is quite famous in some circles.