Military Review

Two options for upgrading BMP-2 from "Kurganmashzavod"

96
Infantry fighting vehicle BMP-2, created in the late seventies, still remains in service with several dozen countries. However, over the decades that have passed since the start of mass production, these machines have become outdated and no longer meet all the requirements for this class of equipment. In this connection, various modernization projects for the BMP-2 appear regularly, the purpose of which is to increase the level of protection, effectiveness in combat, etc. A few weeks ago, two new versions of the BMP-2 update were created by Russian designers.


BMP-2 4th Separate Guards tank Kantemirov Order of Lenin of the Red Banner Brigade


According to the ARMS-TASS news agency, the Kurganmashzavod enterprise recently completed work on two options for upgrading the infantry combat vehicle BMP-2. As follows from the available information, both projects imply the minimum possible change in the composition of equipment and weapons, with the help of which one can achieve a noticeable increase in the combat qualities of the vehicles. Sighting equipment (in both upgrades) and an armament complex have undergone major changes. The second option, among other things, differs from the base machine in the composition of the barrel armament, and also involves the installation of new sighting devices.

With reference to the representative of the defense industry, ARMS-TASS reports on the features of both projects. Thus, in the first version of the modernization of an infantry fighting vehicle, the installation of a new gunner-sight operator is envisaged. The device model B07K2 is equipped with a system for stabilizing the field of view in two planes, a thermal imaging channel and a laser rangefinder. The video signal from the new sight is transmitted to the monitor installed on the operator’s workplace. The commander’s workplace is proposed to equip the TKN-AI model with a new observation device. New sighting devices of the upgraded BMP-2 are integrated into the PNK-2-42 aiming complex. This system provides full control of all weapons from the workplace of the gunner operator, and also allows the commander of a combat vehicle to take over part of the gunner’s work. Using the PNK-2-42 complex, the crew of the BMP-2 can determine tank type targets at night at distances up to 3 km. Effective firing of anti-tank guided missiles is carried out in any conditions at a distance of 4 km.

During the modernization of the infantry fighting vehicle, Kurganmashzavod specialists suggested using new guided missiles. Instead of the 9K111 “Fagot” missile system or 9K113 “Competition” on the upgraded BMP-2, it is proposed to use the “Storm” / “Attack” 9К120. The new complex uses a semi-automatic missile guidance system, which greatly facilitates the work of the operator. The operator-gunner is only required to keep the target mark on the target. The calculation of all the necessary parameters and control of the rocket is carried out by automation. The nomenclature of the anti-tank missile complex 9K120 includes munitions with tandem cumulative, thermobaric and rod warheads. The latter is intended for the destruction of enemy aircraft.

There is information about the use in the project of modernization of some tools that increase the level of protection. On the front and side hull sheets, as well as on the bottom it is supposed to install additional reservations. In addition, it is possible to install anti-cumulation grids and active protection systems. Inside the troop compartment, it is proposed to install airborne seats that absorb part of the energy of a mine explosion. Thus, the complex of additional protection means, consisting of several elements, allows to improve the protection of the base machine both against bullets or fragments, and against explosive devices. However, with the use of all possible means of increasing the level of protection, the weight of the combat vehicle significantly increases, which can correspondingly affect mobility, the ability to overcome water obstacles by swimming, etc.

Depending on the wishes of the customer, the upgraded infantry fighting vehicle can be equipped with a new UTD-23T diesel engine with a capacity of 360 l. with. that should have a positive impact on its mobility. In addition, it is possible to update the suspension, which consists in installing new torsions and support rollers.

Both versions of the BMP-2 modernization, developed by Kurganmashzavod, retain the original set of barrel weapons. The 2А42 30 mm and 7,62 mm PKTM machine gun are stored in the turret of the vehicle. In this case, in one of the options for upgrading the combat vehicle, the installation of an additional weapons. In this case, the BMP-2 gets the gunner's sight BPK-3-42 and the remote-controlled installation with an AGS-17 automatic grenade launcher of the 30 mm caliber. A grenade launcher can improve the effectiveness of fire on manpower or unprotected enemy equipment. An interesting fact is that the second modernization project differs from the first only in the presence of the sight of another model and the turret with an automatic grenade launcher.

In two new projects for the modernization of the infantry fighting vehicle BMP-2, some technical solutions are used, which were already used in the previous versions of upgrading this type of armored vehicles. The prospects for newly created projects are not yet completely clear. Perhaps any of the countries operating the BMP-2 machines will show their interest in them and order the appropriate modernization of equipment.


On the materials of the sites:
http://arms-tass.su/
http://vpk-news.ru/
http://kurganmash.ru/
http://bastion-karpenko.ru/
Author:
96 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. svp67
    svp67 22 October 2013 07: 47
    +3
    This is certainly good, since the BMP2 is the main combat vehicle of our infantry, and the BMP1 can also be converted into an BMP2 through a not very complicated alteration, but it would be nice to first test these "modernizations", and then draw conclusions - what and in what quantity is needed by our Armed Forces , until the moment when the BMP appears on the basis of "Armata" ...
    1. Basileus
      Basileus 22 October 2013 09: 00
      +6
      Nevertheless, the armored infantry fighting vehicles based on Almaty are a bit different) Light floating infantry fighting vehicles will also remain. On the basis of the same Kurgan.
      1. svp67
        svp67 22 October 2013 09: 05
        11
        Quote: Basileus
        Light floating infantry fighting vehicles will also remain. On the basis of the same Kurgan.

        All sorts of "behi" are needed, all sorts of "behi" are important ...
        1. skeptic-
          skeptic- 22 October 2013 10: 24
          +3
          Quote: svp67
          All sorts of "behi" are needed, all sorts of "behi" are important ...


          Especially with destroyed bridges.
    2. cdrt
      cdrt 23 October 2013 00: 24
      +2
      Quote: svp67
      This is certainly good, since the BMP2 is the main combat vehicle of our infantry, and the BMP1 can also be converted into an BMP2 through a not very complicated alteration, but it would be nice to first test these "modernizations", and then draw conclusions - what and in what quantity is needed by our Armed Forces , until the moment when the BMP appears on the basis of "Armata" ...


      Hmm ... but why is it better than Berezhka?
      For me, the crib + gratings from the research institute of steel + add. booking + communication + CIUS. And that’s enough.
      Well, maybe - try to take out the tanks from before, placing them on the sides behind, brewing loopholes.
  2. Su-9
    Su-9 22 October 2013 08: 59
    +8
    "additional booking is supposed to be set"
    I thought that security is seriously increased - at least as M113 - is this not the main problem of the BMP-2? What is the use of these weapons modernization efforts?
    and then, half of the payload for weapons that will be difficult to apply even against two KPV ...
    The soldier must be protected first.
    1. svp67
      svp67 22 October 2013 09: 06
      +3
      Quote: Su-9
      The soldier must be protected first.
      Sometimes maneuverable, high-speed and "water-floating" (amphibious) properties are the best protection for a soldier ...
      1. Su-9
        Su-9 22 October 2013 09: 18
        +3
        I will not argue, the pilot himself. But who fought - everyone said that it was very "sometimes".
        1. skeptic-
          skeptic- 22 October 2013 10: 56
          +6
          Quote: Su-9
          I will not argue, the pilot himself. But who fought - everyone said that it was very "sometimes".


          Especially if you forget that BMPs are not tanks. Simply put, these are lightly armored transporters with light weapons, for highly operational delivery of soldiers, as close as possible to the zone of contact with the enemy. Naturally, any exaggeration of BMP capabilities leads to unjustified victims, but this does not mean that this type of equipment is supposedly not needed. In the end, counter-terrorism activities require a different technique, and they will fight against the new technology, with ever-increasing explosive charges, which will always be ahead. Therefore, it is necessary to develop more means of determining and neutralizing minefields and ambushes. This is the future, and not attempts to denigrate weapons used for other purposes. Actually, on clothes and legs are stretched. In the hope of a new technique, you can’t discard the old, to the complete set of new. Like that.
      2. cdrt
        cdrt 22 October 2013 13: 51
        +1
        Sometimes maneuverable, high-speed and "water-floating" (amphibious) properties are the best protection for a soldier ...

        About "waterfowl" - is it an infantry fighting vehicle that will float away from the enemy's KPVT bullet? laughing
        And about high-speed - but it was already ... the war of 1967.
        The slow Centurions on the battlefield were more maneuverable than the nimble and fast AMX-13s, which hid from cover to cover.
        It seems that after this experiment, all subsequent generations of tanks made a lot more secure (heavier)
    2. Prohor
      Prohor 22 October 2013 15: 22
      +6
      Two CPVs are fifteen thousand times more difficult to find than one RPG! But it is hardly possible to protect oneself from RPGs through modernization.
    3. Alekseev
      Alekseev 22 October 2013 17: 58
      +2
      Quote: Su-9
      I thought that security is seriously increased - at least as M113

      And how to increase the M113?
      I think we do not quite own the information as there really everything is rising.
      But then any military specialist will say that it’s not possible to seriously increase the armor protection of light armored vehicles. request Here exclamations are heard: at least to keep KPVT!
      At the same time, they forget to proclaim from what distance and which "part" it was holding.
      But at the same time, they completely forget why, in fact, the KPVT was created - to combat lightly armored targets.
      To keep serious PTS, it is necessary, however, to make a new, heavy BMP, based on the tank.
      Such machines are undoubtedly needed for their tasks. But light armored vehicles, and army cars with relatively little protection and without it, are the same.
      Each candle should know its hearth.
      In my opinion, the installation of stabilizers, modern sights with thermal imagers, modern ATGMs - all this is absolutely correct and necessary.
      And to enhance security, it would be necessary to develop a unified modular easily removable protection for the most likely damage zones. According to the options - heavy, medium, light. To confidently "hold" a KPVT bullet from 150 meters at least and, with some luck, an RPG grenade (grilles, remote control where possible, etc.).
      They write about developments in this area, but "really, roughly, visibly" the results are not yet visible.
  3. Professor
    Professor 22 October 2013 09: 00
    -3
    How long can you "upgrade" this Infantry Mass Grave? After all these "upgrades" will fighters still ride on armor? For scrap them !!!

    PS
    Very similar to this "modernization"
    1. svp67
      svp67 22 October 2013 09: 09
      +7
      Quote: Professor
      How long can you "upgrade" this Infantry Mass Grave? After all these "upgrades" will fighters still ride on armor? For scrap them !!!

      Thank you for your concern, but somehow we'll figure it out ourselves ...
      1. Professor
        Professor 22 October 2013 09: 21
        -1
        Quote: svp67
        Thank you for your concern, but somehow we'll figure it out ourselves ...

        Who are you? wink
        1. svp67
          svp67 22 October 2013 09: 30
          +9
          Quote: Professor
          Who are you?

          Full-fledged citizens of RUSSIA, who live Her fate, serve Her and fight for Her ... And thank you for your care, understand your affairs, you have enough there ...
          1. Katsin1
            Katsin1 22 October 2013 17: 15
            -8
            I completely agree with svp67. Russia interests me only where it prevents us from living (for example, deliveries of the Yakhonts of Syria or C300 to Iran). Professor’s experiences regarding BMP-2 insecurity really look ridiculous and inappropriate ...
            1. Yars
              Yars 22 October 2013 18: 15
              +5
              why did Syria not please you there? Or do not get rid of megalomania ?! They did the right thing that they delivered the C300, delivered it a little, it was necessary to install the T-90 with Arena, mi-28, su-34 and even at least a rook modernized! Your teryug in Syria would have been gone!
            2. Blackgrifon
              Blackgrifon 22 October 2013 20: 17
              +2
              Quote: Katsin1
              where does she interfere with us


              We deliver a little - we need more so that we dare to interfere less. Mb remind you who supplied the weapons and equipment of Georgia?
    2. leon-iv
      leon-iv 22 October 2013 09: 19
      +2
      On their scrap !!!
      very thick
      And how do I see that constipation you fetish?
      1. Professor
        Professor 22 October 2013 09: 23
        -3
        Quote: leon-iv
        very thick

        Not at all. Until they get rid of them all will be "modernized" and the guys will be killed.
        And I'm not indifferent to Zapikam. All the same, my first car.
        1. leon-iv
          leon-iv 22 October 2013 09: 36
          +8
          Until they get rid of everything, they will "modernize" and kill the guys.

          As they say, it is better to be rich and healthy.
          And choosing to have Kurganets in the future, and now BMP-2. Need to find a balance. I would just set a normal sight there and that’s it. And then either to the storage base or to the conversion.
        2. Alekseev
          Alekseev 22 October 2013 18: 08
          +6
          Quote: Professor
          Until they get rid of everything, they will "modernize" and kill the guys.

          Straight not a professor, but an ardent "fryntovik"! smile
          This is a junk, then a landfill!
          Maybe he specifically proposes to disarm so that there is nothing to fight off the "partners" with. wink
          "Armat" and other similar "merkav" cannot be done in an instant ...
          The guys are mostly ruined not at all BMP, and stupidity, sometimes betrayal, politicians of military commanders and, unfortunately, the guys themselves, too.
          A BMP and other BTT need to be modernized.
          1. Professor
            Professor 22 October 2013 21: 47
            -3
            Quote: Alekseev
            Maybe he specifically proposes to disarm so that there is nothing to fight off the "partners" with.

            Can you read? I just propose to arm ourselves with exclusively high-quality products, and not to upgrade trash.
            1. Alekseev
              Alekseev 23 October 2013 10: 52
              0
              Quote: Professor
              Can you read?

              We know how! laughing
              But we believe that arming the army (including mob.resources) of such a huge country as Russia a new
              Quote: Professor
              exclusively high-quality products
              not possible for economic reasons, and the proposed upgrades currently still have the right to life.
    3. Akim
      Akim 22 October 2013 09: 35
      +6
      Quote: Professor
      How much can you "upgrade" this Infantry Mass Grave

      And there is something to quickly replace it?
      1. Professor
        Professor 22 October 2013 09: 51
        +4
        Quote: svp67
        Full citizens of RUSSIA

        Hint that I will not pass face control? And by the way, as I did not notice in the rules of the site that only Full-fledged citizens of RUSSIA can leave comments here. Will you let me speak out too? Pliz, pliz, pliz ...

        And about the technology being discussed, its protection leaves much to be desired.

        Quote: leon-iv
        And then either to the storage base or to the conversion.

        and then from conservation and into battle and again the 200s ...

        Quote: Akim
        And there is something to quickly replace it?

        Of course. Just hang down and stand in line to sell finished equipment, a license, etc., but pride does not allow it.
        Lets buy Gloki, but doesn’t call armored vehicles to fighters.
        1. sscha
          sscha 22 October 2013 10: 33
          +5
          Why do we need YOUR armored vehicles? To provide you with orders? We have our own .... Matter of time. hi
          1. Professor
            Professor 22 October 2013 10: 38
            +2
            Quote: sscha
            Why do we need YOUR armored vehicles? To provide you with orders? We have our own .... Matter of time. hi

            I’m not offering my armored vehicles to anyone here. Orders can also be provided to Russian enterprises producing the necessary MODERN equipment, and not making old-fashioned upgrades. So apparently it’s not his own, but the soldiers can’t wait, risking their lives daily.
            1. IS-80
              IS-80 22 October 2013 13: 26
              +3
              Professor, do you have your own small candle factory for the production of armored vehicles? laughing
        2. Akim
          Akim 22 October 2013 10: 41
          +4
          Quote: Professor
          Lets buy Gloki, but doesn’t call armored vehicles to fighters.

          Well, you compared X ... with a finger. Everything must be done in parallel. Upgrading a planned replacement should not interfere.
          1. Professor
            Professor 22 October 2013 10: 47
            +8
            Quote: Akim
            Well, you compared X ... with a finger. Everything must be done in parallel. Upgrading a planned replacement should not interfere.

            I express my opinion exclusively (although some believe that the opinion of the Mossad). While these coffins will be in the army (no matter for what reason) they will be used and killed. On the day when they are brought to the open-hearth furnace, the Moscow Region will suddenly have money for normal modern equipment and a miracle will happen - in a year the soldiers will sit down for armor, not armor.
            1. Akim
              Akim 22 October 2013 11: 20
              +5
              Quote: Professor
              While these coffins will be in the army (no matter for what reason) they will be used and killed

              This logic is in the spirit of "Why haven't you put down your skates yet." Poland and the Czech Republic are not prevented from changing them in parallel with modernization.
              1. Professor
                Professor 22 October 2013 11: 22
                +1
                Quote: Akim
                This logic is in the spirit of "Why haven't you put down your skates yet." Poland and the Czech Republic are not prevented from changing them in parallel with modernization.

                Poland and the Czech Republic are not at war with anyone, and the possibilities they have are not comparable with Russia.
                1. Akim
                  Akim 22 October 2013 11: 36
                  0
                  And Russia is fighting with someone? Fortunately not. And as for the possibilities. Russia still has a bunch of types of weapons that need to be pulled up (in particular, the fleet) so there is room for spraying its forces. okromya new armored vehicles.
                  1. Professor
                    Professor 22 October 2013 11: 39
                    +5
                    Quote: Akim
                    And Russia is fighting with someone? Fortunately not.

                    It is clear that Georgia has already won, but in the Caucasus they are still shooting ...

                    Quote: Akim
                    Russia still has a bunch of types of weapons that need to be pulled up (in particular, the fleet) so there is room for spraying its forces. okromya new armored vehicles.

                    How many people died in the fleet over the past 10 years, but on these coffins?
                    1. Akim
                      Akim 22 October 2013 13: 36
                      +5
                      Quote: Professor
                      but in the Caucasus they’re still shooting ...

                      In guerrilla warfare, MRAPS are needed. But BMP-2 or M2 Bradley has nothing to do with it. It’s clear that Israel has modern partisan opponents and you should initially make armored vehicles for the specifics of the war. In the Soviet Union there was no such equipment because these cars burned dozens in Chechnya. This machine is for combined arms combat. Do you not know that the Arab BMP-1 did a good job in the Persian Gulf War, while Bradley even knocked out Iraqi tanks, but turned out to be helpless in a guerrilla warfare. Why then did the Americans not write it off, but continue to modernize it?
                      1. Professor
                        Professor 22 October 2013 13: 57
                        0
                        Quote: Akim
                        In guerrilla warfare, MRAPS are needed. But BMP-2 or M2 Bradley has nothing to do with it.

                        Brag about what you used in the war in Georgia.

                        Quote: Akim
                        It’s clear that Israel has modern partisan opponents and you should initially make armored vehicles for the specifics of the war.

                        Where have I ever hinted about Israel?

                        Quote: Akim
                        Do you not know that the Arab BMP-1 did a good job in the Gulf War?

                        Give up. This papelats from DShK makes its way.

                        Quote: Akim
                        Why then did the Americans not write it off, but continue to modernize it?

                        The Americans are much more new Stalker promote other horned ones like Buffalo.

                        Quote: IS-80
                        And in AOI there are such or analogues?

                        AOI does not make friends with wheeled armor ...
                      2. IS-80
                        IS-80 22 October 2013 14: 03
                        +2
                        Quote: Professor
                        AOI does not make friends with wheeled armor ...


                        But I wonder why?
                      3. Akim
                        Akim 22 October 2013 14: 29
                        +2
                        Quote: Professor
                        Brag about what you used in the war in Georgia.

                        And that in the war of the "three eights" there were big losses in this class of armored vehicles?
                      4. Professor
                        Professor 22 October 2013 14: 36
                        0
                        Quote: Akim
                        And that in the war of the "three eights" there were big losses in this class of armored vehicles?

                        And in that war, the fighters dissected on the armor, and not on the armor.

                        Quote: IS-80
                        Quote: Professor
                        AOI does not make friends with wheeled armor ...

                        But I wonder why?

                        Mud afraid (joke). Historically.
                      5. IS-80
                        IS-80 22 October 2013 14: 49
                        0
                        Quote: Professor
                        Mud afraid (joke). Historically.

                        You see, the professor even in AOI, where there are very extremely stupid people, are for caterpillars, and you are agitating us for wheels. laughing
                      6. Professor
                        Professor 22 October 2013 14: 58
                        +1
                        Quote: IS-80
                        You see, the professor even in AOI, where there are very extremely stupid people, are for caterpillars, and you are agitating us for wheels.

                        I am campaigning for the protection of the crew and the landing, and whether this is achieved by tracks or wheels is monopenisual to me. By the way, the IDF did not put into service a single captured Russian infantry fighting vehicle. Guess why?
                      7. IS-80
                        IS-80 22 October 2013 16: 57
                        0
                        Quote: Professor
                        The thrust to put everything on the tracks is known to me. Indeed, in a nuclear war it’s more reliable. laughing But there’s no war yet, and this tracked technique isn’t measured by a solarium, but this is not a problem. Nobody counts money ...


                        But you said?
                      8. SkiF_RnD
                        SkiF_RnD 22 October 2013 17: 41
                        +2
                        I can not help but insert a commentary - Soviet BMPs have performance characteristics, which can be both pros and cons, depending on the specifics of the application. And, of course, Israel does not need mobility and the ability to force water barriers afloat, achieved just by all possible lightening of the structure, for nothing. Conversely, security is critical, which would dramatically increase the weight of the machine. Of course, the IDF does not use this technique. Precisely because mobility at the expense of protection is not needed there. Your statements about "coffins" and those who die using them, this does not explain in any way. Russia needs a fast and light vehicle, the main thing is to use it correctly and supplement it with a heavy infantry fighting vehicle based on the "Armata".
                      9. Professor
                        Professor 22 October 2013 21: 52
                        +1
                        Quote: SkiF_RnD
                        And, of course, Israel does not need the gift of mobility and the ability to force water barriers afloat, achieved just the same by all-round lightening of the structure.

                        Likbez. It was Israel, having overcome a distance several times greater than its territory, forced under fire a water barrier called the Suez Canal. And he did it twice. However, this is not about Israel.
                      10. SkiF_RnD
                        SkiF_RnD 28 October 2013 22: 09
                        0
                        That is, Suez can be forced on the BMP? Did I understand you correctly?
                      11. Professor
                        Professor 28 October 2013 22: 39
                        0
                        Quote: SkiF_RnD
                        That is, Suez can be forced on the BMP? Did I understand you correctly?

                        Not properly. Did this without a BMP.
                        http://topwar.ru/34927-modernizaciya-btr-50p-ot-muromteplovoza.html#comment-id-1
                        618227
            2. Akim
              Akim 22 October 2013 15: 07
              +4
              Quote: Professor
              And in that war, the fighters dissected on the armor, and not on the armor.

              Yes, wearing at least a super-BMP in chain mail, they will still be sitting on the armor.
            3. Professor
              Professor 22 October 2013 15: 13
              +1
              Quote: Akim
              Yes, wearing at least a super-BMP in chain mail, they will still be sitting on the armor.

              As soon as the armor is safer than on the armor, they will immediately begin to use it for its intended purpose. Everyone wants to live.
            4. Akim
              Akim 22 October 2013 15: 25
              +2
              Quote: Professor
              As soon as the armor is safer than the armor

              As soon as the field of view is reduced, they will immediately come out back.
            5. Lopatov
              Lopatov 22 October 2013 15: 26
              +1
              What field of view?
            6. Akim
              Akim 22 October 2013 17: 13
              +1
              Quote: Spade
              What field of view?

              Do you not know: "I sit from above, I look far away."
            7. Lopatov
              Lopatov 22 October 2013 19: 24
              +1
              The fact of the matter is that sitting on the armor of a protected car is not necessary.
        3. Professor
          Professor 22 October 2013 15: 28
          0
          Quote: Akim
          As soon as the field of view is reduced, they will immediately come out back.

          I understand that everyone except the Russians does not have two eyes, but at least 8. That is why they bourgeois sit at the armor and do not worry about the review and only the Russians are forced to sit on the armor and turn their heads in all directions. It turns out different physiology ... wassat
        4. Akim
          Akim 22 October 2013 16: 18
          +3
          Quote: Professor
          I understand that everyone except the Russians has not two eyes, but at least 8

          And we are not wearing seat belts in the city. Bad sign.
        5. Professor
          Professor 22 October 2013 16: 21
          +1
          Quote: Akim
          And we are not wearing seat belts in the city. Bad sign.

          I heard about this. The Arabs here also believe in such signs because of them, and the mortality rate in road accidents is much higher. wassat

          PS
          Just outside the city, you don’t have to fasten it. With an accident at a speed of 120 km / h, the belts are no longer important.
  4. Lopatov
    Lopatov 22 October 2013 14: 40
    0
    More than tank. Especially if you take into account the armored personnel carrier.
  5. Katsin1
    Katsin1 22 October 2013 17: 28
    -3
    You, Professor, are talking nonsense ... But Zeev?
  6. Professor
    Professor 22 October 2013 21: 49
    +1
    Quote: Katsin1
    You, Professor, are talking nonsense ... But Zeev?

    Nonsense you say. You still remember the armored buses.
  7. Black Colonel
    Black Colonel 22 October 2013 16: 05
    +2
    "And Bradley even knocked out Iraqi tanks"
    Well, when did that happen? Iraqi BMP-2 "Abrasha" soaked from 30-mm cannon in the stern, there was a case (APU, MTO). And I have not met your information.
  8. castle
    castle 22 October 2013 18: 35
    0
    You, my sir, probably live in some kind of information vacuum. February 26, 1991. http://military.discovery.com/tv-shows/greatest-tank-battles/videos/greatest-tan
    k-battles-gulf-war-m2-bradley-vs-t-72.htm
  9. Lopatov
    Lopatov 22 October 2013 19: 27
    +1
    Let's be honest, the Iraqi tanks did not soak the Bradley infantry fighting vehicles, but the good old Tou installed on them.
  10. Akim
    Akim 22 October 2013 20: 06
    0
    Quote: Spade
    Iraqi tanks did not soak the Bradley infantry fighting vehicles, but the good old Tou installed on them

    I would like to look at the exercises as a 24/30-mm gun breaks through the armor. We, too, use the bassoons for this purpose. But their BMPs were knocked out.
  11. Lopatov
    Lopatov 22 October 2013 20: 30
    0
    Quote: Akim
    I would like to look at the exercises as a 24/30-mm gun breaks through the armor.

    It breaks through. T-55 aboard the APDS-T shell.
  12. Akim
    Akim 22 October 2013 22: 07
    0
    Quote: Spade
    It breaks through. T-55 aboard APDS-T shell

    Quite possibly. Belgian and in the forehead 100 mm will flicker. Only we do not have armor-piercing subcaliber. These ammunition of caliber 30x165 is not provided by our nomenclature
  13. Lopatov
    Lopatov 22 October 2013 22: 19
    0
    And where are we? It's about "Bradley", which soaked Iraqi tanks. Having the ability to wet them with her cannon, she nevertheless moved under the cover of several tanks to positions located outside the effective range of Iraqi tanks and infantry fighting vehicles. And from these positions, she shot Iraqi armored vehicles with impunity. Those. "Bradley" was used as a self-propelled ATGM installation. Why them? And because in the "heavy" divisions self-propelled anti-tank guided missiles were on the Humvee, and in this case it was impossible to use them (hello to fans of "Tigers" with "Cornets")
  • Prohor
    Prohor 22 October 2013 15: 33
    +4
    I served in Transbaikalia, and I even saw a warehouse for storing sea mines somewhere in the Sherlovskaya Gora area ... But the fleet has nothing to do there, but modern armored vehicles are needed, because although we kissed China in the city, it is the most probable (and unusually insidious) enemy of Russia.
  • leon-iv
    leon-iv 22 October 2013 10: 49
    +4
    and then from conservation and into battle and again the 200s ...

    if for lack of anything better will be BMP-2 then it is possible and her.
    A soldier for riding on armor must be beaten on the head. Yes, and the officers too. They think it's safer there. Aleni.
    1. Professor
      Professor 22 October 2013 10: 53
      +5
      Quote: leon-iv
      if for lack of anything better will be BMP-2 then it is possible and her.

      If it was a question of Lithuania or Georgia, then there was still nothing where they were so rich and glad. However, Russia can afford to get rid of this trash once and for all.
      1. Zhenya
        Zhenya 22 October 2013 11: 26
        +2
        Professor I agree, I can afford it, but they are modernizing it, which updates the car for 10 years, although the car itself launders money for 30-40.
      2. samoletil18
        samoletil18 22 October 2013 12: 16
        +5
        Quote: Professor
        Quote: leon-iv
        if for lack of anything better will be BMP-2 then it is possible and her.

        If it was a question of Lithuania or Georgia, then there was still nothing where they were so rich and glad. However, Russia can afford to get rid of this trash once and for all.


        With the correct use and strengthening of armaments, the T-34 can be made dangerous to the abrams. Rambo won out of the bow of all.
      3. Black Colonel
        Black Colonel 22 October 2013 16: 09
        +2
        But this stuff is used in third countries and BMPs there are relevant for the price. Why shouldn’t they upgrade these pepelats if interest arises?
    2. volkodav
      volkodav 22 October 2013 12: 34
      +3
      But but, you watched a hooker with your own eyes how the guts evenly spread on the armor the IEDs made of a 50 liter cylinder ,? before you call other avenues you first need to learn about the problems live and not from books and Internet articles. What armor do not do and the power of a land mine is always higher
  • Per se.
    Per se. 22 October 2013 11: 08
    +5
    Quote: Professor
    How long can you "upgrade" this Infantry Mass Grave? After all these "upgrades" will fighters still ride on armor? For scrap them !!!

    Do you recommend such a car?
    1. Professor
      Professor 22 October 2013 11: 14
      +2
      Quote: Per se.
      Do you recommend such a car?

      Do you like wheeled?



      [Center]
      1. Bykov.
        Bykov. 22 October 2013 11: 23
        +1
        Quote: Professor
        ... wheeled will suit you? ...

        Of course they will arrange somewhere with a well-developed network of roads.
        Where is the thread in Israel in order to quickly fly to Gaza, ... but how in the mud?
        1. Professor
          Professor 22 October 2013 11: 25
          +4
          Quote: Bulls.
          Where is the thread in Israel in order to quickly fly to Gaza, ... but how in the mud?

          The Swedes and Finns do not complain about cross-country ability, but what do they understand in technology? wink
          1. Bykov.
            Bykov. 22 October 2013 11: 28
            +1
            Quote: Professor
            ... but what do they understand in technology? ...

            Yes, well, of course they understand everything, within the framework of their interests, but we still have different ones.
            1. Professor
              Professor 22 October 2013 11: 36
              0
              Quote: Bulls.
              Yes, well, of course they understand everything, within the framework of their interests, but we still have different ones.

              From this place, please read more. They have interests in having firepower, mobility and protection for the crew and the landing. And you?
              1. Bykov.
                Bykov. 22 October 2013 11: 58
                +2
                Quote: Professor
                Quote: Bulls.
                Yes, well, of course they understand everything, within the framework of their interests, but we still have different ones.

                From this place, please read more. They have interests in having firepower, mobility and protection for the crew and the landing. And you?

                Yes, everything is the same, only not in the euro interior, but off-road, where it’s much more efficient, not wheels, in trucks.
                1. Professor
                  Professor 22 October 2013 12: 44
                  +1
                  Quote: Bulls.
                  Yes, everything is the same, only not in the euro interior, but off-road, where it’s much more efficient, not wheels, in trucks.

                  The thrust to put everything on the tracks is known to me. Indeed, in a nuclear war it’s more reliable. laughing Only there is no war yet, and this tracked technique isn’t measured by a solarium, but this is not a problem. Nobody thinks money ... Although when it comes to modernizing atavism or buying the modern, they suddenly start to think it's cheaper.

                  PS
                  "Eurointerior" really saves the lives of guys.
                  1. Versed
                    Versed 23 October 2013 12: 36
                    -2
                    The professor is right! Modern technology saves the lives of soldiers. But in the Russian army they never thought (and are not going to) about the lives of soldiers, using them as consumables.

                    In the video, the Stryker armored personnel carrier blew up on an IED in Afghanistan. I am sure that everything would have died in the BTR80 or BMP, and therefore Russian soldiers ride on the armor, and not behind it (the Professor absolutely correctly noticed)

                    1. Lopatov
                      Lopatov 23 October 2013 13: 07
                      +2
                      Or maybe you will not engage in amateurism?

                      Quote: Versed
                      I’m sure that everyone would die in the BTR80 or BMP, and so Russian soldiers ride on the armor

                      They are in vain sure. And they ride on armor not only because of mines.
              2. Federal
                Federal 22 October 2013 12: 08
                -6
                That's right, Mr. Professor, drive these suckers of patriots, half-learned facts, only for hysteria and ready for the sake of the most "unique" and unsurpassed trash bravo!
                1. Bykov.
                  Bykov. 22 October 2013 12: 21
                  +3
                  Quote: Federal
                  That's right, Mr. Professor, drive these suckers of patriots, half-learned facts, only for hysteria and ready for the sake of the most "unique" and unsurpassed trash bravo!

                  And most weakly, what is behind someone's back more relaxed? Yes?
          2. Victor
            Victor 22 October 2013 12: 42
            +4
            Quote: Professor
            The Swedes and Finns do not complain about cross-country ability, but what do they understand in technology?

            Svens and Chukhonians no longer have rough terrain. How do they know what impassability is?
            1. Professor
              Professor 22 October 2013 12: 46
              +1
              Quote: Victor
              Svens and Chukhonians no longer have rough terrain. How do they know what impassability is?

              I remember that fools and roads are in other places, but the bourgeoisie are not only going to fight at home, but also their eastern neighbor. After all, they are known as aggressors and invaders.
              1. Victor
                Victor 22 October 2013 19: 29
                +4
                Quote: Professor
                I remember that fools and roads are in other places,

                Well, the stump is clear that fools and roads are not Jews’s misfortune, they, Jews from these fools and roads, fled to the promised land, where there are no aggressors and everyone loves each other right up to death! And yet, they, the Jews, are now teaching everyone , what to do, how to cook cabbage soup, how to raise a country, to whom to help, and to whom to pile. Smart people, all straightforward professor, not like fools on broken roads. Respect!
                1. Professor
                  Professor 22 October 2013 21: 54
                  0
                  Quote: Victor
                  Well, the stump is clear that fools and roads are not Jews’s misfortune, they, Jews from these fools and roads, fled to the promised land, where there are no aggressors and everyone loves each other right up to death! And yet, they, the Jews, are now teaching everyone , what to do, how to cook cabbage soup, how to raise a country, to whom to help, and to whom to pile. Smart people, all straightforward professor, not like fools on broken roads. Respect!

                  And on the topic, something clever to say is what?
                  1. Massik
                    Massik 23 October 2013 04: 52
                    +1
                    I don’t quite understand you, the BMP’s task of transporting soldiers and supporting infantry in battle, if they started slaughtering it already during transportation, then for those inside of it, by any means (I mean a full-scale conflict, and not the rebel army), they’ll even immobilize them in the tank and will be shot. Aviation, artillery, RPGs and ATGMs will equally well destroy a tank or BMPT, if the enemy is not weak in mind, he will respond to the growth of the target’s armor with a more powerful means of destruction ...
                  2. Victor
                    Victor 23 October 2013 11: 42
                    +1
                    Quote: Professor
                    And on the topic, something clever to say is what?

                    Of course! Since the Russian Federation, in accordance with its military doctrine, is not going to attack other states, it is supposed to conduct defensive actions on its territory, and, as you know, it is many thousands of times larger than Israel and does not provide this vast territory with roads along and across seems possible. Comparative tests of tracked and wheeled vehicles in Russian conditions clearly show the advantages of the tracked track, as on the BMP-2, which, after modernization, in conditions of very rough terrain covered with forests, can very successfully still operate on the far arm and ambush any type of armored vehicle techniques sworn friends. Conclusion - the modernization of the BMP-2 in the interim, until the Russian army is equipped with new infantry fighting vehicles.
                    1. Professor
                      Professor 23 October 2013 11: 50
                      -1
                      Quote: Victor
                      Since the Russian Federation, in accordance with its military doctrine, is not going to attack other states, it is supposed to conduct defensive actions on its territory

                      Well, yes I noticed this 8.08.2008/XNUMX/XNUMX

                      Quote: Victor
                      Comparative tests of tracked and wheeled vehicles in the Russian conditions clearly show the advantages of the tracked track

                      You don’t talk about it loudly, otherwise partners from the West will hear and transfer from their wheeled vehicles to tracked ones. They are not going to fight at home (they have such a doctrine).

                      Quote: Victor
                      Conclusion - the modernization of the BMP-2 in the interim, until the Russian army is equipped with new infantry fighting vehicles.

                      The conclusion was understood, they will fight again on the armor.
                    2. Victor
                      Victor 23 October 2013 12: 02
                      +1
                      Quote: Professor
                      Well, yes I noticed this 8.08.2008/XNUMX/XNUMX

                      Now it’s quite clear that you are not a good-natured Jew, but the very enemy of our country. After all, it was BMP-2 modernized by Israel that was in service with the Georgian Army, on which the Georgians moved to Tskhinval after the brutal execution of peaceful sleeping people by the Georgian MLRS. No, professor, we defended our citizens from what was prepared by yours, and maybe by you personally, people of the aggressor. Finally, you have shown yourself in all MASADOVA glory !.
                    3. Professor
                      Professor 23 October 2013 12: 07
                      -1
                      How emotional. fellow Next time, please be more precise with the statement of geography and "your territory".
                      Otherwise, I have no complaints, although I do not share your opinion on the tracked vehicles.
                    4. Victor
                      Victor 23 October 2013 12: 14
                      +1
                      Quote: Professor
                      How emotional. Next time, please be more precise with the statement of geography and "your territory".

                      I did not write that South Ossetia is our territory, I wrote about the protection of our citizens who have Russian citizenship.
                      By the way, what about the constant Israeli air strikes on the territory of foreign countries? Or are we prescribed bl ... o not to be confused with a misunderstanding?
                    5. Professor
                      Professor 23 October 2013 12: 23
                      -1
                      Quote: Victor
                      I did not write that South Ossetia is our territory, I wrote about the protection of our citizens who have Russian citizenship.

                      You wrote about military doctrine and "your territory". We will leave stories about how Russian citizens got to the territory of another state.

                      Quote: Victor
                      By the way, what about the constant Israeli air strikes on the territory of foreign countries? Or are we prescribed bl ... o not to be confused with a misunderstanding?

                      Well, the aggressors, who is arguing. wink And Israel has no military doctrine.
                    6. Victor
                      Victor 23 October 2013 12: 34
                      +1
                      Quote: Professor
                      Well, the aggressors, who is arguing. And Israel has no military doctrine.

                      Yes, professor, you are a real enemy! High-quality! I am glad to hope that someday we will overlap!
                    7. Professor
                      Professor 23 October 2013 12: 37
                      -1
                      Quote: Victor
                      Yes, professor, you are a real enemy! High-quality! I am glad to hope that someday we will overlap!

                      Option one. Sign up as a volunteer in the Arab Legion or other Arab organization and fight. laughing
                    8. Victor
                      Victor 23 October 2013 12: 54
                      +1
                      Quote: Professor
                      Option one. Sign up as a volunteer in the Arab Legion or other Arab organization and fight.

                      No, dear professor, I can’t join the Arab Legion, I’m Orthodox, and they didn’t teach me how to cut off my heads. I was taught to fight, and not to commit terrorist attacks from around the corner, crippling innocent people. I think that someday, the Jews will nevertheless cross the permitted line and get stuck at the very most I can not. Then we will meet. It seems to me that I'm not the only one who dreams about it. hi soldier
                    9. Versed
                      Versed 23 October 2013 13: 12
                      -6
                      Yes, they’ve already met, the Soviet army barely took their feet from the Middle East - In the 6-day, and then the Doomsday War. But this scoop was not enough, so they were boiled back in Lebanon at the most ...
                      Want more? Russia will not stand it anymore and will fall apart completely - how and when the USSR shamefully fell into 15 parts
                    10. Lopatov
                      Lopatov 23 October 2013 13: 24
                      +1
                      Quote: Versed
                      Yes, we’ve already met, the Soviet army barely took their feet from the Middle East

                      ?????
                    11. Victor
                      Victor 23 October 2013 18: 08
                      +1
                      Quote: Spade
                      Quote: Versed
                      Yes, we’ve already met, the Soviet army barely took their feet from the Middle East
                      ?????


                      He heard a ringing about our units in Egypt, but like many, he does not know where he is. It is a pity that little information is given to the masses on this topic.
                    12. Versed
                      Versed 23 October 2013 19: 09
                      -2
                      The combat effectiveness of the Russian army is not higher than the Egyptian or Syrian (nuclear weapons do not count)
              2. Professor
                Professor 23 October 2013 13: 54
                -1
                Quote: Victor
                No, dear professor, I can’t join the Arab Legion, I’m Orthodox, and they didn’t teach me how to cut off my heads. I was taught to fight, and not to commit terrorist attacks from around the corner, crippling innocent people.

                Then I have to disappoint you, we are on the same side of the front line and our enemies are actually common.

                Quote: Victor
                I think that someday, the Jews will nevertheless cross the permitted line and get stuck at the very most I can not. Then we will meet. It seems to me that I'm not the only one who dreams about it.

                I don’t know who drew this line and who allows anyone, but even in delirium I can’t imagine that Israel will attack Russia.
              3. Victor
                Victor 23 October 2013 18: 04
                +2
                Quote: Professor
                Then I have to disappoint you, we are on the same side of the front line and our enemies are actually common.

                Dear professor, please explain to me how we can have common enemies if there is permanent support by Israel for Al-Qaeda units in Syria ?. Israel is fighting terrorism with one hand, and supporting it with the other. If this is not true, then please, kindly, maybe we don’t know something?
              4. Professor
                Professor 24 October 2013 09: 08
                0
                Quote: Victor
                Dear professor, please explain to me how we can have common enemies if there is permanent support by Israel for Al-Qaeda units in Syria ?. Israel is fighting terrorism with one hand, and supporting it with the other. If this is not true, then please, kindly, maybe we don’t know something?

                Do not believe fairy tales. Israel does not support anyone in Syria, not a word, not a spirit and not a shekel. For the third year, everyone has been looking for Israeli weapons there, but have not found.
                Things to the studio!
  • GDP
    GDP 22 October 2013 14: 59
    +7
    In Finland, very rough terrain, many rivers, lakes and swamps. It was for the war against Finland that the Red Army had the first amphibious tanks and armored snowmobiles ...
  • IS-80
    IS-80 22 October 2013 13: 13
    +3
    Quote: Professor
    Do you like wheeled?


    And in AOI there are such or analogues?
  • Black Colonel
    Black Colonel 22 October 2013 16: 12
    +2
    And what, the passengers in the airborne squad are sitting, looking at each other?
  • Aleks tv
    Aleks tv 22 October 2013 13: 51
    +8
    Quote: Professor
    On their scrap !!!

    As a tanker and supporter of BMP-T, I already somehow organically dislike BMP-2 ...
    But:
    First, nana saturate the BMP-3 and Kurgan troops, and then only the "bekhs" on ... BHVT.
    Equipment of this class is also needed.
    1. IS-80
      IS-80 22 October 2013 14: 16
      -1
      Quote: Aleks tv
      Quote: Professor
      On their scrap !!!

      As a tanker and supporter of BMP-T, I already somehow organically dislike BMP-2 ...
      But:
      First, nana saturate the BMP-3 and Kurgan troops, and then only the "bekhs" on ... BHVT.
      Equipment of this class is also needed.

      I do not agree with you as a supporter of BMPT + BTR-T. BMP-3 is needed only as a temporary option until they bring to mind Kurganets, Boomerang, BMPT and BTR-T based on Armata and Typhoon.
      1. Aleks tv
        Aleks tv 22 October 2013 15: 58
        +5
        Quote: IS-80
        BMP-3 needed only as a temporary option until they bring to mind Kurganets

        I will correct you a little:
        BMP-3 needed until Kurganets put in linear parts in bulk.
        And this will, unfortunately, not be fast.

        ps And yet it is not known which of these machines is better.
  • Dimon-chik-79
    Dimon-chik-79 22 October 2013 09: 30
    +6
    21st century, gentlemen, comrades! It’s possible, of course, to stop a decade more with the order of modernizing obsolete equipment. But a power like Russia should have created a modern machine yesterday, using all the available experience and devoid of those significant shortcomings, having already put on edge the Equipment that would reliably protect fighters and crew, capable of powerful support of infantry with fire and not lost in speed and maneuverability
    1. svp67
      svp67 22 October 2013 09: 52
      +2
      Quote: Dimon-chik-79
      But such a power as Russia should have created a modern machine yesterday, using all the available achievements and devoid of those significant shortcomings, which have already put on a sore edge

      I agree, it should, but now she's gone, what's next? So, "volens not volens", but "modernization" is inevitable ...
      1. IS-80
        IS-80 22 October 2013 13: 22
        +1
        Quote: svp67
        Quote: Dimon-chik-79
        But such a power as Russia should have created a modern machine yesterday, using all the available achievements and devoid of those significant shortcomings, which have already put on a sore edge

        I agree, it should, but now she's gone, what's next? So, "volens not volens", but "modernization" is inevitable ...


        Maybe it is necessary to modernize, but in what direction? Keep the same profile or use the chassis for a new car?
        1. svp67
          svp67 22 October 2013 13: 25
          +1
          Quote: IS-80
          Maybe it is necessary to modernize, but in what direction? Keep the same profile or use the chassis for a new car?

          But this should be shown by tests including the MILITARY ...
  • Akim
    Akim 22 October 2013 09: 30
    +6
    Modernization should cost no more than a third of the price of a new car, otherwise it loses its meaning.
    1. svp67
      svp67 22 October 2013 09: 38
      +2
      Quote: Akim
      Modernization should cost no more than a third of the price of a new car, otherwise it loses its meaning.

      This is only when there is something new, and when not ... Then the T64A turns into the T64B and this is also an upgrade, and this procedure costs like "two or three old cars" and the point was ...
      1. Akim
        Akim 22 October 2013 10: 42
        +2
        Quote: svp67
        That T64A turns into T64B

        This has never happened before. (It seems) the new T-64Bs left the factory.
  • Russ69
    Russ69 22 October 2013 10: 05
    0
    Last year, the Moscow Region announced a competition for modernization, several hundred BMP-2, but it did not pass. It seems like the price did not suit.
    And it is necessary to modernize, even with the Boomerang launched into series, the rearmament process will take no less time ...
  • Zhenya
    Zhenya 22 October 2013 10: 15
    +6
    BMP-2 is the workhorse of the current army of the Russian Federation and of course no one will write it off, but at least somehow it is necessary to strengthen this outdated morally and physically miracle.
  • castle
    castle 22 October 2013 10: 33
    +6
    Good health to all.
    Modernization of modernization discord. You know it yourself - money. We have made such a modernization project
    http://zpravy.idnes.cz/armada-resi-dosluhujici-bvp-dpj-/zpr_nato.aspx?c=A130527_
    090959_zpr_nato_inc
    A tracked vehicle is needed, but now they are calculating what will be more profitable, to upgrade in this version or to buy something new.
    1. Zhenya
      Zhenya 22 October 2013 11: 19
      +2
      Yes, a very good upgrade.
  • samoletil18
    samoletil18 22 October 2013 10: 38
    13
    I read the comments, and I remembered one conversation of an officer at a shooting range (I was a "staff rat"). They discussed the PM, they say, a pukalka, but some kind of Czech pistol - both accurate and powerful. And then I imagined: the adversary is attacking us, and these commanders with an accurate and powerful pistol are waiting for the enemy to reach the lethal range. Why lead, I'd rather shoot. The task of the officer is in managing the unit, and personal weapons are given for self-defense or to shoot an alarmist.
    Also with BMP: use tactically wisely and for the intended purpose. then the improvement of weapons will give a huge gain in combat use. And the weak commander of the BMP based on the "Black Eagle" will be lost after the first second of the battle. Therefore, the modernization of such a plan is very correct, if only smart operators need to be raised for this weapon.
    1. Victor
      Victor 22 October 2013 12: 47
      +4
      Quote: samoletil18
      Also with BMP: use tactically wisely and for the intended purpose. then the improvement of weapons will give a huge gain in combat use. And the weak commander of the BMP based on the "Black Eagle" will be lost after the first second of the battle. Therefore, the modernization of such a plan is very correct, if only smart operators need to be raised for this weapon.

      I fully and unequivocally support it. An attempt to use an infantry fighting vehicle as a light tank initially dooms it and the crew to death. Any equipment should be used in accordance with its intended purpose.
    2. IS-80
      IS-80 22 October 2013 13: 48
      0
      Quote: samoletil18
      I read the comments, and I remembered one conversation of an officer at a shooting range (I was a "staff rat"). They discussed the PM, they say, a pukalka, but some kind of Czech pistol - both accurate and powerful. And then I imagined: the adversary is attacking us, and these commanders with an accurate and powerful pistol are waiting for the enemy to reach the lethal range. Why lead, I'd rather shoot. The task of the officer is in managing the unit, and personal weapons are given for self-defense or to shoot an alarmist.
      Also with BMP: use tactically wisely and for the intended purpose. then the improvement of weapons will give a huge gain in combat use. And the weak commander of the BMP based on the "Black Eagle" will be lost after the first second of the battle. Therefore, the modernization of such a plan is very correct, if only smart operators need to be raised for this weapon.


      Well, why exaggerate? A gun is still needed, but you don’t need to make a superweapon out of it for all occasions.
  • kopleev
    kopleev 22 October 2013 11: 15
    +3
    BMP 2, in the near future, no one will write off. A full replacement in the troops of this machine for the "troika" is not foreseen for another years ...... Therefore, let them modernize, bring to a modern state at least sighting navigation complex. A slight increase in armor may not be what was expected, but at least from the direction of attack it will keep KPVT. And this will save the life of the crew.
  • Lesnik
    Lesnik 22 October 2013 11: 25
    +1
    Quote: skeptic
    Quote: svp67
    All sorts of "behi" are needed, all sorts of "behi" are important ...


    Especially with destroyed bridges.

    Let me ask - have you often crossed the water obstacles?
    BMP-1 and BMP-2 were created for a specific task and the offensive doctrine of the USSR Armed Forces and that’s it!
    1. samoletil18
      samoletil18 22 October 2013 12: 37
      +3
      Quote: Forestman
      Quote: skeptic
      Quote: svp67
      All sorts of "behi" are needed, all sorts of "behi" are important ...


      Especially with destroyed bridges.

      Let me ask - have you often crossed the water obstacles?
      BMP-1 and BMP-2 were created for a specific task and the offensive doctrine of the USSR Armed Forces and that’s it!


      What do you mean by a defensive doctrine? Burrowing into the ground around the perimeter of the country? It's impossible. The apotheosis of defense is a counterattack on a weakened enemy, and on an infantry fighting vehicle it is possible not only to safely throw up a reserve, but also to maintain fire. So would drive the troops to the front line by truck or on foot - cheap and cheerful. It is clear that the troops will no longer be introduced into the breakthrough, but it will take a long time to wait for the BMP-3 to be retrofitted. And here is the defense for the troops. In order to drive not in armor, but in armor, it is necessary to organize correctly reconnaissance, combat security, air support and artillery, to insure tanks. You must be able to fight with your head and with all available means, and not just with available means.
      1. Lesnik
        Lesnik 22 October 2013 12: 50
        0
        And here is a defensive doctrine? The goals and tasks assigned to the means of transportation and fire support of the infantry have changed. According to modern criteria for armor protection and fire capabilities, control and communications, neither BMP-1, BMP-2, BMP-3 are suitable in principle because of the design features, which in turn proceeds from the goals and objectives that were assigned to them by the USSR Ministry of Defense.
      2. IS-80
        IS-80 22 October 2013 13: 50
        0
        Quote: samoletil18
        You must be able to fight with your head and with all available means, and not just with available means.


        Yeah, still arms and legs. laughing
  • malikszh
    malikszh 22 October 2013 15: 00
    0
    photo 4th guards. tank brigade
    1. Lopatov
      Lopatov 22 October 2013 15: 02
      +1
      There is. It's just that this team is called differently.
      1. malikszh
        malikszh 22 October 2013 15: 44
        0
        4th Guards Tanka Kantimerovskaya is now a division? no, am I mistaken?
        1. Lopatov
          Lopatov 22 October 2013 19: 35
          0
          It is called a division but at the same time remains a brigade.
  • Sergey Medvedev
    Sergey Medvedev 22 October 2013 17: 04
    0
    Quote: Professor
    Do you like wheeled?


    http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/1f/Patria_AMV_sisältä.jpg
    In this machine there are not even loopholes. The landing party is sitting and looking at each other, the comrades are correcting their makeup. Geyropa, her mother ...
  • vm68dm
    vm68dm 22 October 2013 17: 56
    +1
    And I like the modification (BEREZHOK) more !!! Cool video! hi
  • Lesnik
    Lesnik 22 October 2013 18: 15
    -1
    Quote: Sergei Medvedev
    http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/1f/Patria_AMV_sisältä.jpg

    In this machine there are not even loopholes. The landing party is sitting and looking at each other, the comrades are correcting their makeup. Geyropa, her mother ...

    Accepting your logic, loopholes should be everywhere where the serviceman is, including in the closet door
    1. Akim
      Akim 22 October 2013 18: 36
      +3
      Quote: Forestman
      , including in the closet door

      And there is a loophole, in the form of a heart.
  • deman73
    deman73 22 October 2013 18: 46
    0
    well, what a good idea to upgrade the behi and sell them for a cordon, only before that you can saturate your troops with new ones and the old ones for modernization
  • voliador
    voliador 22 October 2013 21: 05
    +1
    Using the PNK-2-42 complex, the BMP-2 crew can determine targets of the “tank” type at night at ranges of up to 3 km. Effective firing with anti-tank guided missiles is carried out in any conditions at a distance of up to 4 km.
    Is it like that? You can only see from 3 km, and knock out already from 4 km?
    1. Lesnik
      Lesnik 22 October 2013 21: 57
      +1
      I’m embarrassed to ask - what is the direct line of sight on the proposed theater? what are these show-offs for?
      1. Lopatov
        Lopatov 22 October 2013 22: 20
        0
        TVDs are different. What if the Kazakhs have to help?
        1. Lesnik
          Lesnik 22 October 2013 22: 52
          0
          For this, there were modifications of the standard armament and military equipment in the USSR Armed Forces, which is exactly what we see in this example, unfortunately the military-industrial complex in those days did not differ in quick response to the needs of the army. And with regard to the theater, there are certain features, such as the prevailing topography, the refractive index of the air, depending on the season, etc. And do not present the modification as a qualitatively new breakthrough in the combat capabilities of this type of weapon.
          1. Lopatov
            Lopatov 22 October 2013 23: 45
            0
            Do you think that increasing the range of anti-tank systems is a trifling matter for a couple of weeks?

            And, I apologize, where are the "modifications"?
  • Lesnik
    Lesnik 23 October 2013 00: 00
    0
    Quote: Spade
    And, I apologize, where are the "modifications"?

    I’m embarrassed to ask, isn’t the ATGM included in the armament complex of this modification?

    And, I apologize, where are the "modifications"?

    The combat use of anti-tank systems depends on the visual (hardware) target recognition. Did not see (did not recognize) didn’t shoot the target or am I mistaken? I am pleased to learn something new for myself.
    Modification does not imply a fundamental change in the properties of an object. Namely, improving the properties or facilitating the use (operation) is not something cardinal.
    1. Lopatov
      Lopatov 23 October 2013 13: 16
      0
      There is a lot of water, but where is the essence?
      How are you going to prove the need to limit the range of ATGM use in accordance with the possibilities of using infantry fighting vehicles in the "supposed theater of operations" (by the way, which, in the steppe and mountains, and in the semi-enclosed area of ​​the European theater of operations, they are different)?
      How is it possible to quickly change the maximum range of the ATGM application if necessary?
      1. gallville
        gallville 23 October 2013 15: 25
        0
        Quote: Spade
        How are you going to prove the need to limit the range of ATGM use in accordance with the possibilities of using infantry fighting vehicles in the "supposed theater of operations" (by the way, which, in the steppe and mountains, and in the semi-enclosed area of ​​the European theater of operations, they are different)?

        But it has long been proven. The average line of sight in Europe is about 4 km. What does it mean that beyond 4 km it will be stable - a forest / group of plants with a height of more than one meter (definition from military topography), landscape changes, building / me.
        Quote: Spade
        How is it possible to quickly change the maximum range of the ATGM application if necessary?

        Conducting research in the field of military topography.
        1. Lopatov
          Lopatov 23 October 2013 15: 30
          0
          Quote: gallville
          But it has long been proven. The average line of sight in Europe is about 4 km.

          Then it needs proof that our infantry fighting vehicles will be used exclusively in Europe.
          1. gallville
            gallville 24 October 2013 14: 27
            0
            And here the following points pop up:
            1. In terms of export, it is advisable for the customer to watch what he buys. It is advisable for the seller to assess the needs of the customer (and not just vaparize, and then justify the machine not for the TVD, they didn’t use our own - it’s clear that it’s not our way if this is another country).
            2. Modification to customer requirements - by the way, global practice. This applies not only to external, but also to internal orders.
  • Tommygun
    Tommygun 23 October 2013 10: 18
    +1
    My opinion: each task should have its own technique.
    In tank and motorized rifle brigades / divisions BMP / BTR on a tank chassis. I do not see the fundamental meaning in a floating infantry fighting vehicle with a non-floating tank.
    Highly mobile light armored vehicles are needed in the Airborne Forces, MP, reconnaissance, etc. Naturally new, designed taking into account the combat use of previous models.
    Into the internal troops
    And finally stop using the technique for unusual tasks. This refers to the use, for example, of the Airborne Forces with its lightest vehicles as infantry.
    In the meantime, there are no new models, modernization is necessary, but according to the technical specification from the Ministry of Defense, and not who in what is much. And the fact that the "specialists" of the Ministry of Defense cannot create technical specifications even for small arms speaks only of their incompetence.
    1. Akim
      Akim 23 October 2013 10: 39
      0
      Quote: Tommygun
      . I do not see the fundamental meaning in a floating infantry fighting vehicle with a non-floating tank.

      To cross to the other side, you must first capture and hold the line. A minimum company of floating infantry fighting vehicles in the tank brigade is needed.
  • Lesnik
    Lesnik 23 October 2013 10: 48
    0
    Quote: Akim
    Quote: Tommygun
    . I do not see the fundamental meaning in a floating infantry fighting vehicle with a non-floating tank.

    To cross to the other side, you must first capture and hold the line. A minimum company of floating infantry fighting vehicles in the tank brigade is needed.

    The tank brigade as a rule does not conduct b / d independently. And if it is entered into a breakthrough for building up, then as a rule the enemy does not undermine the bridges since he does not have time wink and let me remind you of the availability of appropriate equipment that is included in the tank kit for forcing water barriers.
    1. Tommygun
      Tommygun 23 October 2013 10: 59
      -1
      There is also MTU. And the crossing on floating armor across the river causes maximum fire resistance, which makes up for the dubious chances of success. The chances of MTU on a tank chassis IMHO are more preferable. In any case, a powerful art is needed. training.
      A floating armor is relevant for the rapid crossing of unsecured obstacles.
      1. Akim
        Akim 23 October 2013 13: 04
        0
        Quote: Tommygun
        And the crossing on floating armor across the river causes maximum fire resistance, which makes doubtful the chances of success

        Until there is a bridgehead on the other side of the crossing there can be no question. Naturally, any forcing is carried out after aviation and artillery preparation, but the Rubicon must be passed. Otherwise, any spotter will bring both the bridge and the crossings to hell.
  • arcturus
    arcturus 16 January 2014 17: 35
    0
    BMP-2, over time, shows one big plus ... soldiers learn more about the capabilities of this machine from their fathers and grandfathers than their commanders.