U-turn "in a tank": will the Boomerang surpass the BTR-90 Rostock in terms of maneuverability?

Will the promising Boomerang armored personnel carrier be deployed on-site in a tank-like way, like its older brother, the BTR-90 Rostok, and why it might need it.

Regarding the participation of Soviet armored personnel carriers BTR-60/70/80 in the Afghan war, relevant conclusions were drawn about what promising equipment should be. In addition to poor booking, insufficient firepower, a rather large turning radius was also noted as a shortage of APCs used in Afghanistan. So, for the BTR-80, the minimum outer overall turning radius is 13,2 m. In this, the wheeled vehicle loses significantly to the tracked: Tanks, BMP, BMD and self-propelled guns can turn around, which is called the "heel."

Therefore, when designing the BTR-90, there was just the possibility of turning the 22-ton armored vehicle in place. This is due to the rotation of the wheels of the different sides in opposite directions.

They said that foreign potential buyers of the car during public demonstrations were simply shocked by the presence of such a possibility in the "Sprout". In this, our “bronnik” was strikingly different not only from the old Soviet cars, but also from most of the western ones. At one time, at one of the shows, the author had a chance to talk with an officer, the regiment of which in the first Chechen regiment was in Grozny. Their BTR-70, not only literally “rained down” during the march, but also in urban areas on the narrow streets often became just helpless, unlike the same BMP.

Mock BTR "Boomerang"

Not surprisingly, the Syrian military, who are now in practically the same situation, use only infantry fighting vehicles during battles in the city, preferring the BMP-2.

Our Russian unique Rostok, although it was adopted, did not go into the series. Instead, they began to design the average unified wheeled platform "Boomerang".

Whether the new BTR will have the same maneuverability capabilities as the BTR-90 is not yet known. They said that the novelty will take the best that is in domestic and foreign equestrian construction. So it is, we find out in the next few years.

Comments

[Ruslan]

Well, if you don’t add this tank U-turn, then it’s completely stupid! at the same time, when a boomerang appears, by the number of advantages and disadvantages it will be possible to finally figure out why it was conceived: for the security of the country or your own pocket?

[Akim]

I have a question. What size will it be? The 2A42 cannon and the 30 mm Bushmaster have approximately one barrel length of 2400/2410. Look at the length and size of the Polish Wolverine. And many visually call its dimensions a dream for a grenade launcher.

[Apollo]

by title and content of the topic

[Ruslan]

it would be great to create a new 30mm gun with a series of ammunition for it, or at least foresee such a prospect. but about the height. honestly, I never heard that the low altitude of the BTR-60,70,80, 1,2 and BMP-XNUMX would prevent the enemies in Afghanistan and Chechnya from getting over them. and for managed ptrk, this is probably not a problem at all. but on a boomerang, the anti-cumulative gratings, as it seems to me, should be made standard equipment. at least minimal protection against conventional RPGs.

[Akim]

Quote: ruslan

it would be great to create a new 30mm gun

It’s better to return the 37 mm shells and make a cannon based on 2A42.

[Argon]

In my opinion (although I may be wrong), it is not entirely correct to turn an armored personnel carrier (in fact, an armored bus) into a wheeled infantry fighting vehicle. However, some level of mine protection is certainly necessary, but not to the detriment of amphibiousness, and something is needed to counter RPG shots. doing with the widespread proliferation of these weapons is a big problem. As for the issue raised in the article, the use of transmissions on wheeled vehicles providing the "base 1 \ 2" mode is significant, it will increase the cost of the car 3-4 times, there will be no time for ceramics.

[recruit6666]

and in which conflict did they immediately overcome water barriers?

[Argon]

the first and second Chechen (seizing bridgeheads on the Terek) operations on the east coast of Africa (late 70s and early 80s) generally praise the examples.

[IS-80]

Quote: Akim

Quote: ruslan

it would be great to create a new 30mm gun

It’s better to return the 37 mm shells and make a cannon based on 2A42.

45 mm and no 37 mm compromises.

[Akim]

Quote: IS-80

45 mm and no 37 mm compromises.

The old 45mm shells are very large and heavy. Make telescopic - you need time money and weapons for them. Yes, they are not needed. And 37x155 already from the time of the Second World War there (scrap from 37x199) and what for more? HIS HEAD IS ENOUGH TO PUNCH A 100 MM ARMOR.

[IS-80]

What do you want on it to arrange artillery dueling with tanks?

[Akim]

Quote: IS-80

to arrange artillery dueling with tanks

No. Heavy BMP / BTR (BBM) with additional armor protection of tanks of the 1st post-war generation. And some are even higher.

[IS-80]

Is this for example Puma? But is this 37 mm shell enough for her if they talk about protection in variant C from 40-50 mm shells?

[Akim]

Quote: IS-80

But is this 37 mm shell enough for her if they talk about protection in option C

It depends on what. 37x199 can, 37x155 not. Of course, but the Germans are not going to dress them like that. additional armor eats dynamics, increases size, reduces the possibility of pontoons. To the extreme, there are ATGMs on them and a duel will occur (EuroSpike vs Cornet or Bumblebee). The Germans are not going to increase the caliber of Mauser, but simply significantly increased the length of the barrel.
A 37-mm shell (37x155), in addition to a 1,5 times larger explosive substance than 30x165, has a 2-fold more fragmentation effect.

[IS-80]

And with a 45 mm shell, the high-explosive and fragmentation effect is even higher. What for example when shooting at long distances is better. And armor piercing, too.

Quote: Akim

The Germans are not going to increase the caliber of Mauser, but simply significantly increased the length of the barrel.

Maybe because an easy upgrade is cheaper than buying a new development? But they are developing, and regarding Puma there was talk about the possibility of installing a larger caliber gun.

Quote: Akim

Germans are not going to dress them like that. additional armor eats dynamics, increases size, reduces the possibility of pontoons

Nevertheless, they will and will have to fight with them.

[Akim]

Quote: IS-80

And with a 45 mm shell, the high-explosive and fragmentation effect is even higher. What for example when shooting at long distances is better. And armor piercing, too.

I am not saying that such a gun is worse. Rather, the opposite.
Just a caliber of 35-37 mm is enough to solve problems, and the fact that the Germans put on extra armor is what you remember Lake Peipsi. The same rake.

[Igor39]

Then you need to put 57mm with the PT 76, there is already ready with a gun and put next to 30mm.

[matio]

125mm or 152.A 203,2? I think that if there is no emblem, it’s Stryker.

[Seventh]

They put 80A2 on the BTR 72A, I didn’t see a big difference with the 42nd, except for the principle of operation, but there is a huge inconvenience of reloading the 72nd, the 200 rounds ammunition consists of 2 parts - the upper and lower feeds and this at a rate of fire above 300. Reload can take place only at the base and takes about an hour of time in 4 hands. Why should I not repeat the mistakes on the new samples.

[erased]

Again from the armored personnel carrier make the battlefield machine. And then why the hell BMP? What is the point of having 2 homogeneous cars with different chassis? Where is the vaunted unification? BTR - armored taxi, its weapons are only for self-defense. Yes, booking is good. BMP to support infantry in battle, she and weapons need powerful.
Apparently again lobbying different firms to reload the army with homogeneous equipment, repair bases, spare parts, and weapons will require huge amounts of money. But manufacturers will be enough.

[Akim]

Quote: erased

BTR - armored taxi, its weapons are only for self-defense.

Now they are moving away from this division and prefer to call the vehicles BBM (Armored combat vehicle). Depending on the tasks and region, they can be either wheeled or tracked. This is how at one time introduced the category of MBT.

[erased]

BBM - as tanks were called in Germany - Panzerkampfvagen. The MO has not yet announced such a concept. And the models are already coming. Everything is like with a submachine gun. Pieces 12 have already been made, but they will not choose a single one. Not even for the army, but for the Ministry of Internal Affairs.

[_KM_]

A floating wheeled vehicle with heavy armament and armor is a dead end. The requirements are too contradictory. It is more logical to create a heavy infantry fighting vehicle on a tracked chassis and a floating "armored taxi" on a wheeled chassis.

[washi]

Quote: Akim

Quote: erased

BTR - armored taxi, its weapons are only for self-defense.

Now they are moving away from this division and prefer to call the vehicles BBM (Armored combat vehicle). Depending on the tasks and region, they can be either wheeled or tracked. This is how at one time introduced the category of MBT.

So it may be better to create a new class of equipment to combat terrorists, saboteurs, etc. for armament of explosives, and let MO work on equipment better suited specifically to hostilities?

[Akim]

Quote: Vasya

and let the MO work on equipment better suited specifically to hostilities?

And "Boomerang" seems to be created not as a universal machine.

[repytw]

Quote: IS-80

What do you want on it to arrange artillery dueling with tanks?

Why increase the caliber above 30 mm, do not need to do BMP, for this there will be ATGMs. The armored personnel carrier should have weapons supporting the motorized rifle squad at medium distances against the same infantry, there should be an AGS unit and it would be nice to increase the caliber to 40-45 mm, you can provide for the possibility, if necessary, of the mobility of the PKT, ATGM and AGS so that the armored personnel carrier , could remove and use his weapon aside from the APC, without endangering it, mount it there on captured equipment or create additional firing points on the defensive.

[D_L]

I think it will turn out a good technique!