Military Review

Battle module "Boomerang-BM"

42
On January 20, Russian President V. Putin visited the Tula factory “Shcheglovsky Val”, which is a batch production of the Instrument Engineering Design Bureau (KBP). The head of state was shown the latest developments of Tula designers, from rifle weapons and ammunition to modern anti-aircraft missile systems and advanced developments. Together with a delegation of officials, employees of various mass media visited the plant. The video and photo materials from the event captured various products produced by the Shcheglovsky Val factory. In addition, information about the latest developments has got into the lenses of cameramen and photographers.


Battle module "Boomerang-BM"
Probable placement of systems on the new layout "boomerang-BM"


Perhaps the most interesting element of the exposition was a stand with information about the new combat module, designed for installation on various armored vehicles. The unmanned Boomerang-BM combat module, as is clear from the information available, is a continuation of a family of similar Tula development systems. Like a number of previous developments in this class, the Boomerang-BM module can be installed on different chassis. On the information stand, captured by journalists, were depicted combat vehicles based on the chassis "Boomerang", "Kurganets-25" and "Armata". All three hypothetical vehicles are equipped with the Boomerang-BM combat module.

Prospective combat module "Boomerang-BM" has one characteristic feature that distinguishes it from other domestic developments of this class. Inside this module are not provided for accommodation crew. The main advantage of this technical solution is the ability to reduce the size of the module, as well as to increase the level of crew protection by placing it inside the body of the combat vehicle.

Armament "Boomeranga-BM" is similar to that used on other combat modules developed by the Instrument Design Bureau. The module is proposed to equip 2X42 30 mm caliber 7,62-mm automatic cannon PKT machine gun, as well as anti-tank missile complex "Cornet". Probably, such a composition of weapons was chosen with the aim of unifying promising combat vehicles armed with the Boomerang-BM module with the existing equipment.

The most interesting feature of the Boomerang-BM combat module is the use of a crewless assembly. Due to the lack of habitable volumes, Tula designers managed to more tightly assemble the internal aggregates of the module and thereby reduce its overall dimensions. In the middle part of the combat module, approximately above the axis of rotation of the tower, it is proposed to place the mechanisms of attachment and vertical guidance of the barrel weapon. On the sides of the breech of the gun and machine gun systems are provided ammunition. As follows from the existing scheme, the supply of projectiles for the gun is on the right side, and the cartridges enter the machine gun on the left. Shops guns and machine guns proposed to be placed in a semicircle along the back wall of the crew compartment.



In the combat compartment of the unmanned combat module there is a place to accommodate a relatively large ammunition load. In the boxes of ammunition for the gun you can fit up to 500 shells of several types. Thus, the information stand speaks about the ammunition of a cannon from 160 armor-piercing tracer and 340 high-explosive fragmentation projectiles. In the machine gun shop you can lay up to 2000 cartridges. In addition, launchers on the sides of the combat module allow you to transport and use four guided missiles in transport and launch containers.

The 2X42 automatic cannon allows you to attack targets at a distance of up to 4000 meters (as indicated on the information stand), and Kornet guided missiles, depending on the modification, can destroy equipment or enemy fortifications at a distance of 8 or 10 kilometers. The effective range of the machine gun coupled to the gun does not exceed several hundred meters.

The combat module "Boomerang-BM" is equipped with two blocks of sighting equipment. One of them must be used by the gunner and is located in front of the module, to the right of the gun. The commander unit is located on the left and above the barrel arms. The exact composition of the sighting equipment, for obvious reasons, is unknown. Probably, the crew of the combat vehicle will be able to use a video or thermal imaging channel. The missiles of the Kornet anti-tank complex use laser beam guidance, which indicates the use of appropriate equipment in the combat module.

In the front of the combat module there are some blocks of equipment, the purpose of which remains unknown. It is possible that Boomerang-BM will receive an active protection complex or a system of optical-electronic countermeasures. On the roof of the combat module several communication equipment antennas and an atmospheric state sensor system are provided.

Most of the information about the Boomerang-BM project remains closed to the general public. Nevertheless, even the available information allows to draw some conclusions, even the most general ones.

As mentioned above, the composition of the weapons of a new combat module does not differ from that used in previous systems of this class. Using a combination of 30-mm cannon, machine gun and anti-tank missiles has both advantages and disadvantages. The first can be attributed to the unification with the existing technology, as well as the relatively high characteristics of the weapons used. The lack of an armament complex can be considered the absence of an automatic grenade launcher. In armed conflicts of recent years, weapons systems suitable for the destruction of enemy manpower and light equipment, namely machine guns and automatic grenade launchers, receive special priority. However, in most situations, the weapons mounted on the module can be used with great efficiency.

The perspectives of the new Boomerang-BM combat module are not completely clear. There is reason to believe that it will be used on armored vehicles based on the Boomerang and Kurgan-25 platforms. In addition, some information allows us to consider the new combat module as a kind of transitional link between the techniques of the recent past and the foreseeable future. In the reports on V. Putin’s visit to the Shcheglovsky Val plant, a frame from the presentation “Stages of development of combat modules for armored personnel carriers” was seen. It showed the BMP-2 infantry combat vehicle with the Berehok module, as well as promising tracked infantry fighting vehicles with the Kurganets modules (for some reason it looks like the Boomerang-BM) and Epoch. The first car is related to the 2010 year, the second and the third - to the 2015 and 2020 years, respectively. This means that Russian gunsmiths already have plans for the future associated with the creation of promising combat modules. In light of this information, the new "Boomerang-BM" may be a temporary solution designed to equip new armored vehicles in anticipation of the "Epoch" module.



The combat module "Boomerang-BM" is of great interest for professionals and the interested public. However, by itself, this module is not as interesting as the promising armored equipment for which it is intended. The timing of the “premiere demonstration” of armored vehicles “Boomerang” or “Kurganets-25”, as well as their approximate characteristics, are still unknown. The publication of this information, as well as the detailed characteristics of the new combat module, will make it possible to form a complete opinion on the promising technology of the domestic armed forces.


On the materials of the sites:
http://russia.tv/
http://bmpd.livejournal.com/
http://andrei-bt.livejournal.com/
http://gurkhan.blogspot.ru/
Author:
Photos used:
http://andrei-bt.livejournal.com/
42 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Apollo
    Apollo 22 January 2014 09: 06
    +10
    quote-Most of the information about the Boomerang-BM project remains closed to the general public. Nevertheless, even the available information allows us to draw some conclusions, even the most general ones.
    1. Rustam
      Rustam 22 January 2014 11: 37
      +2
      Bomerang-BM combat crew


      Security guards KBPshny-me please :)


      Epoch is the name of the module - there is no bumereg bm. Kurganets-25 is a platform.

      they like to do PR with us and come up with spectacular names and designations for each re-presentation — a screen around the era of Berezhok (10), Kurganets (15), Epoch (2020) —this is how and for whom for stupid magazines and explosives, for effect?
      1. bask
        bask 22 January 2014 12: 43
        +5
        Quote: Rustam
        Epoch is the name of the module - there is no bumereg bm. Kurganets-25 is a platform.

        Agree Rustam modular AVERAGE on the GSH platform.
        But in the basic configuration, there should be a module, Bahcha, with 100 mm and 30 mm guns.
        The DUBM module, this is understandable, but the 2A42 automatic gun does not have the same power as the “triad” of the BMP3.
        Especially in settlements.
        The combat module on the BMP 2 from LAV-25 with a 25 mm Bushmaster gun.
        1. sds555
          sds555 22 January 2014 14: 38
          +1
          Here are more options for using the combat module
  2. tchoni
    tchoni 22 January 2014 09: 34
    +3
    The project is interesting, and, I think, very promising. Of particular interest is its crewless layout.
    And the composition of the instruments and means for monitoring and controlling the environment raises some hope that there will still be order in the tank troops (motorized rifle).
    Regarding the composition of the armament - for BMP or TBTR - in my opinion, it is even slightly redundant (4 missiles - even a bit too much, but a lot - not a little. (The only thing that causes concern is the poor security of the missiles)). And, if it were my will, to increase the ammunition load of the machine gun and provide it with more serious cooling, which would allow to produce long bursts of a hundred rounds of ammunition, and to increase the rate of fire to 1200 - 1500. (But this is a biased opinion, so to speak from personal experience).
    However, already in appearance, you can make a few comments about the possible directions for its further development.
    1) the protection of the observation devices of the commander and gunner seems insufficient (I draw such a conclusion solely in appearance, therefore, perhaps it is erroneous.)
    2) the commander’s observation devices are unlikely to provide a constant all-round visibility, in which the commander’s peripheral vision would be activated and effectively used.
    1. vladkavkaz
      vladkavkaz 22 January 2014 10: 29
      +3
      tchoni
      4 ATGMs are redundant? I wonder why this is your opinion?
      Why increase the rate of fire of a machine gun? PKT is more than enough.
      But the caliber of the gun, it would be worth increasing. 30 mm is not enough.
      1. tchoni
        tchoni 22 January 2014 15: 33
        +1
        I will explain my position.
        I'll start with the gun - for BMP - enough though, here you are right, you can and more.
        Regarding the machine gun - when you have to shoot "guessing", let's say on the green stuff from which you were unobtrusively fired at - in general, there is a desire to have a minigun in your hands, or even better a flamethrower. My requirements for machine guns are related to the desire to be able to conduct long and intense fire. PKT - even with a massive barrel does not allow this, and overheats the barrel after a burst of cartridges by 50. Yes, if it's hot, you can drop the box at once - but then finita - will not care.
        As for the ATGMs, it’s real, it’s very difficult to find so many goals for them (except for pillboxes during the storming of the city, and even then it’s hard for me to imagine), but it’s easy to damage them when fired, say from a mortar.
        1. pawel57
          pawel57 22 January 2014 21: 53
          0
          You are right about the machine gun. But the Ptur is nevertheless necessary. It is not unknown which enemy is still to meet, useful for a great war. The birds have different equipment and the edge can be carried in the transport of the battalion or kept inside the machine.
          1. tchoni
            tchoni 23 January 2014 16: 00
            0
            No, let them stay outside, only they need protected containers
        2. vladkavkaz
          vladkavkaz 1 February 2014 20: 57
          0
          tchoni RU
          You actually shot from a PC, PKM, PKT ???
          Something I did not observe overheating of the PCM barrel, after a queue of 200 rounds, and after that I shot no worse. Where did you get this stupidity about overheating the PC barrel after 50 shots ??
        3. AndreyS
          AndreyS 7 May 2014 10: 15
          0
          Quote: tchoni
          Regarding the machine gun - when you have to shoot "guessing", let's say on the green stuff from which you were unobtrusively fired at - in general, there is a desire to have a minigun in your hands, or even better a flamethrower.

          I think a minigun is not needed, there’s not much to eat, there is enough FCT which has good characteristics (by the way for FCT it’s a turn of 250 rounds according to the technical specifications), although I would install a Kord machine gun and even in a separate independent module with the ability to fire in all directions, or 12.7 coursework in a spark with a gun, and 7.62 a separate module with control from a command post.
          Quote: tchoni
          As for the ATGMs, it’s real, very difficult to find so many goals for them (except for pillboxes during the storming of the city, and even then it’s hard for me to imagine)

          And ATGMs will not be superfluous! Moreover, to reload have to move to the rear.
      2. AVV
        AVV 22 January 2014 21: 37
        0
        Work is underway, the designer does not stand still, this is very good, so over time, we will be pleased more than once !!!
      3. Akim
        Akim 22 January 2014 22: 08
        +2
        Quote: vladkavkaz
        But the caliber of the gun, it would be worth increasing. 30 mm is not enough.

        37 mm! 37x155 projectile.
  3. erased
    erased 22 January 2014 10: 08
    0
    While there is no data, you can guess to the stop.
    Two things are surprising:
    1. Why is the module with guns 100 mm and 30 mm not created?
    2. Why is there no built-in hypertension? That would be most welcome.
    Although, again, it is up to the customer, that is, the army. If they are satisfied with this option, then they will. But until the final version of the machine with the module is shown, there will be only versions.
    1. the47th
      the47th 22 January 2014 10: 39
      +3
      Quote: erased
      1. Why is the module with guns 100 mm and 30 mm not created?

      But what about "Bakhcha-U"?
      Quote: erased
      2. Why is there no built-in hypertension? That would be most welcome.

      And where to shove it? AG can be placed in the case, as it was in BMPT.
    2. Rustam
      Rustam 22 January 2014 11: 39
      +7
      Why there is no built-in AG


      Have you read the Baron the other day?

      He’s cutting the truth there (another nonsense) - the sights are not protected, there is no grenade launcher, the gun is old

      ps-According to him, "Everything is g__". But the sail is a mega module with a leaky sight, with a "door eye" commander, and a mega cannon ...
      1. rolik2
        rolik2 22 January 2014 13: 38
        +1
        Quote: Rustam
        Have you read the Baron the other day?

        So his eternal opponent GurKhan re-posted his post on his page and what is interesting with comments is that he completely agrees with his conclusions.
        Here, huge stronghold sights were recently discussed, branded as large and are a tasty target for bullets and fragments.
        And here on the front of the module all aiming and navigation equipment is not even covered by armor plates - is this nonsense for you?
        Also weakened armament even in comparison with "Berezhk" where the AGS was installed. Not to mention the BM BMP-3
        1. bask
          bask 22 January 2014 21: 24
          +3
          Quote: rolik2
          And here on the front of the module all aiming and navigation equipment is not even covered by armor plates - is this nonsense for you?

          Well, this equipment is covered on Leo ... A4 lattices on an aiming complex.
          cry.

          1. brainkiller
            brainkiller 22 January 2014 23: 13
            0
            what is it him? atmospheric pressure? laughing
  4. Boris55
    Boris55 22 January 2014 10: 30
    +6
    Quote: erased (3)
    1. Why is the module with guns 100 mm and 30 mm not created?

    And what is this caliber?


    1. TS3sta3
      TS3sta3 22 January 2014 15: 59
      +1
      in the photo most likely "Automatic 57-mm grenade ballistics cannon"
      1. deathwalker-and
        deathwalker-and 31 January 2014 09: 40
        0
        there on the shots of the BC written 2A70
  5. timurso
    timurso 22 January 2014 10: 46
    +2
    what the name, "Boomerang", is somehow ambiguous.
  6. Dmitry 2246
    Dmitry 2246 22 January 2014 10: 55
    +18
    Impressed by the thermal imager and radar. For the first time, it looks like there are enough devices. The characteristics of the means of communication and control are interesting.
    It is not bad to put a "commander's" PKT with remote control, from experience it acts like a "hand" "probed" windows, bushes, fence - forward. Where the bullet whistled, the grenade launcher rarely remains to sit (I want to become small and invisible).
    The direct firing range is about 800 m, so the PKT can, under fire, replace a company of submachine gunners in terms of firing efficiency, who will understand the war. And having identified the enemy - a volley from 2A42. With modern means of destruction, the problem is to see and have time to command. And we must not forget: "I don't see - I don't shoot."
  7. chunga-changa
    chunga-changa 22 January 2014 11: 03
    0
    For a clear field or desert of 8-10 and 4 km, this is excellent. In the context of the settlement, the battle distance is obvious and the requirements for ammunition will be different.
    1. Akim
      Akim 22 January 2014 22: 12
      -1
      Quote: chunga-changa
      In the context of the settlement, the battle distance and ammunition requirements will obviously be different.

      In Yugoslavia - 150-200 meters.
  8. brainkiller
    brainkiller 22 January 2014 11: 20
    +1
    There are not enough blasters =))

    In general, the first thing you involuntarily pay attention to is the healthy, unprotected organs of vision in this module. I doubt that they are in this form quite durable.

    I would also like to see defense complexes of the "arena" type, whose work inspires respect.

    And yet, as I understand it, this thing is completely independent and you can bet on anything?
    Will it fit on a new KAMAZ?

    http://expert.ru/2014/01/21/kak-ustroen-novejshij-voennyij-kamaz/
  9. brainkiller
    brainkiller 22 January 2014 12: 00
    0
    A question for connoisseurs, can a thermal imager see a picture or nicerta through a mirror?
    As I understand it, no, since they don’t even try to hide the expensive matrix under the armor, but still =)
    1. Starover_Z
      Starover_Z 22 January 2014 13: 47
      0
      An almost similar question arose when I read and looked at the photographs, so I added it here.
      But how is modern optics for detection and aiming protected from optoelectronic suppression means?
      Here on the site, in my opinion, there were articles mentioning such body kits for armored vehicles, so it became interesting if the unmanned module would not "go blind" in the first minutes of the battle?
    2. rolik2
      rolik2 22 January 2014 16: 02
      0
      Quote: brainkiller
      A question for connoisseurs, can a thermal imager see a picture or nicerta through a mirror?
      As I understand it, no, since they don’t even try to hide the expensive matrix under the armor, but still =)


      No, the thermal imager does not see either through a mirror or through glass, or through fog or rain.
      1. postman
        postman 23 January 2014 02: 55
        +1
        Quote: rolik2
        No, the thermal imager does not see either through a mirror or through glass, or through fog or rain.

        Nonsense!
        1.TV-converts infrared radiation into an electrical signal
        2.IR emission nobeys the laws of optics, this is electromagnetic radiation




        3. "transparency": plates of germanium and silicon, opaque in the visible region, transparent in infrared (germanium for DW> 1,8 μm, silicon for> 1,0 μm); cesium iodide is transparent for DW - up to 55 μm
        4. "mirror" Most metals have reflectivity for infrared radiation much more than for visible light, and increases with increasing wavelength of infrared radiation. For example, the reflection coefficient of Al, Au, Ag, Cu at a wavelength of ~ 10 μm reaches 98%.
        5. "glass"
        Quote: rolik2
        not through the glass
        bulb not warm?
        A significant proportion (from 70 to 80%) of the radiation energy of incandescent lamps with a tungsten filament is accounted for by infrared radiation.
        When photographing in the dark and in some night observation devices, lamps for illumination equipped with an infrared filter, which transmits only infrared radiation.
        6. "fog and rain" The presence of suspended particles in the atmosphere - smoke, dust, small water droplets (haze, fog) - leads to additional weakening infrared radiation as a result of scattering it on these particles.
        -------------------
        "Walls (concrete, brick)"
  10. spirit
    spirit 22 January 2014 13: 21
    +2
    It’s a pity there are no missiles of the type they shot forgot (in a modern battle it’s unpleasant to lead a missile along a beam from a BMP. Maybe in the future. Or for our command this is too complicated and unpromising, pleasure?))))
    1. brainkiller
      brainkiller 22 January 2014 14: 18
      +1
      What bothers you? laser + thermal imager, protection against active interference, powerful warhead punching three meters of concrete.
      and compared to the "fire and forget" cheap rocket.
      I, as a complete amateur, are quite happy =)
      1. samoletil18
        samoletil18 22 January 2014 22: 50
        0
        I looked, I looked, what kind of Australian native. Then it came to light - Klitschko chilled.
    2. Akim
      Akim 22 January 2014 22: 18
      0
      Quote: spirit
      in a modern battle, to lead a rocket along a beam from an BMP is somehow unpleasant

      17-20 seconds per 5 km. And it costs 2-3 times cheaper.
  11. Fofan
    Fofan 22 January 2014 14: 06
    +2
    and what will happen if you shoot at this tower from a machine gun?
    or shrapnel smear.
    will there be a lot of whole glass?
  12. The comment was deleted.
  13. melman
    melman 22 January 2014 14: 28
    +1
    Quote: erased
    Why is there no built-in hypertension?

    I think the lack of hypertension is due to another factor, it is possible in the future to replace 2a42 with a promising gun of a larger caliber, then there (in the projectile) it will be possible to put a remote-contact fuse. Exploratory work in this regard has been ongoing for a long time. Well, or we don’t know something wink
    1. Akim
      Akim 22 January 2014 22: 20
      0
      Quote: melman
      in the future, replace 2a42 with a promising gun of a larger caliber

      No gun is capable of firing at short range.
  14. Aleks tv
    Aleks tv 22 January 2014 15: 08
    +1
    Remote Combat Module:
    - This is good for protecting the crew.
    - but there must be high requirements for the reliability of weapons and equipment. Failures and jamming has not yet been canceled. Is manual control provided in emergency mode?

    For weapons:
    - I hope that the installation of a larger caliber gun is planned in the future.
    - is the fragmentation protection of ATGMs reliable? Somehow archaic ... XXI century does not smell at all.
    - there are no other weapons.
    - 2000 PCT cartridges in one tape? It's good.

    Sighting system:
    I am glad that there are two of them. Those. when one of them fails, it will be replaced by another. But nevertheless, it is better to “hide” expensive sighting equipment, otherwise it’s like hinged It turns out, and not built-in, this is not a buzz.

    Protection:
    - it pleases if the KAZ (Arena-E?) and the radar will be in the basic configuration, and not "exhibition".
    ..................................

    A small conclusion:
    Pros:
    - The crewless principle of the tower was introduced.
    - Installed more advanced sighting systems.
    Cons:
    “Nothing new in armament.”
    - Archaic protection of missiles and devices.

    I’m not smart, just personal IMHO.
    1. Mister X
      Mister X 22 January 2014 19: 18
      +2
      Quote: Aleks tv
      Protection:
      - it pleases if the KAZ (Arena-E?) and the radar will be in the basic configuration, and not "exhibition".

      It was planned to install the Drozd-2 KAZ developed by the TsKIB SOO KBP branch on the Epoch combat module.
      To tell the truth - I do not see any differences between the modules "Epoch" and "Boomerang-BM"
      Confusion and some kind of overlap: the "Boomerang" armored personnel carrier and the "Boomerang" module.
      Since the weapons of the Epoch and Boomerang-BM modules are identical, it is quite possible that the KAZ will be the same: Drozd-2.

      Assembling the "Epoch" combat module.

      1. Vilor
        Vilor 22 January 2014 21: 33
        +1
        As I understand it, they want to put 2020mm on the "epoch-57", that's the only difference.
  15. Leshka
    Leshka 22 January 2014 15: 52
    0
    cool thing
    1. Yankuz
      Yankuz 22 January 2014 18: 02
      0
      For me it's not ice! Expected more ...
  16. pawel57
    pawel57 22 January 2014 19: 00
    +1
    They correctly write that this is yesterday or on old equipment for modernization. A lot of glass and any unprotected equipment. All this especially in special conditions and with a competent opponent will be defeated. From the side, yes, beautiful, and if the delay is, how can it be eliminated under fire? Modernly, a 57 mm anti-aircraft gun caliber, with a high rate of fire, the PKT still pulls the gun. Uninhabited, as it were, in doubt, I think that the gunner should be able to view through the hatch. The photo above is likely to develop a larger caliber than 30mm.
    1. Cympak
      Cympak 22 January 2014 21: 53
      0
      KBP believes that this module is superior to "Berezhok" and "Bakhchu", because has 2 independent channels of destruction: channel 1 - cannon + machine gun, channel 2 - UR "Kornet". Those. while the gunner is firing from a cannon or machine gun, the commander can hit the second target of the Kornet missile launcher and, probably, vice versa.
    2. Akim
      Akim 22 January 2014 22: 22
      0
      Quote: pawel57
      57 mm anti-aircraft gun caliber,

      Where will the shells be placed?
      1. pawel57
        pawel57 22 January 2014 23: 11
        0
        After all, there is a cry about creating a new BMP i.e. platforms. So let them think. I would now place a 57mm anti-aircraft gun on the Terminator instead of 2 30mm guns. In general, the Terminator is as if dependent. Combat use is debatable.
  17. anarky
    anarky 22 January 2014 21: 48
    0
    I am not an expert in the BBT, but for general tactical reasons I liked the weapons on the Bakhche-U. Add KAZ and make the module uninhabitable and it would be a sweetie. Or am I wrong?
    1. Akim
      Akim 22 January 2014 22: 25
      0
      Quote: anarky
      I liked the weapons on the Bakhche-U. Add KAZ and make the module uninhabitable and it would be a sweetie.

      And then you have to add a complex and expensive automatic loader. Otherwise, how to push 100-mm shells into an uninhabited tower?
      1. anarky
        anarky 22 January 2014 23: 31
        0
        So she has it anyway.
        http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p0juYX9PbCE
  18. SkiF_RnD
    SkiF_RnD 22 January 2014 22: 15
    0
    The "Bakhchi-U" has a serious minus - insufficient anti-tank capabilities. 100 mm ATGM today does not provide reliable destruction of 3rd generation tanks. For a cumulative warhead, the caliber is very important (or rather, the size and shape of the cumulative funnel). The BMP-3 gun is not the best launcher for ATGMs. For comparison, rockets are also fired from 125-mm tank guns, however, the main ATGMs have much larger "dimensions" - the Cornet (presented in this article as part of the module) - 152 mm.
    BGM-71 "TOW" - rocket diameter 0,152 meters. Both ATGMs are six-inch. And on BMP - 100mm. At the same time, installing an additional ATGM in addition to a 100-mm cannon is simply stupid. I will try to suggest that "Bakhcha-U" will not receive distribution among the troops in the future, for this very reason. At the first opportunity they will refuse it. hi
    1. anarky
      anarky 22 January 2014 22: 25
      +1
      I am aware of the insufficient armor penetration of a 100-mm ATGM (although, as I understand it, any APC / BMP will pick up such a thing). But at the squad there is a 100-mm broad + 30-mm gun at the disposal. And this can pick and strengthen soldier

      Why is it so stupid to hang an ATGM outside? In the same "Boomerang-BM" hangs the same. And the sighting complex is already there.
      1. Akim
        Akim 22 January 2014 22: 29
        +2
        Quote: anarky
        (although, as I understand it, any APC / BMP will pick up such a thing).

        Any BMP and 25-mm shell will cripple to death.
        1. anarky
          anarky 22 January 2014 22: 48
          0
          Well, now it seems like a trend such that promising armored vehicles should hold 30mm in the forehead. True I will not give proofs. I read it somewhere on the forums. So then most of the armored personnel carriers of past generations understand the details of the KPVT)

          And the infantry 100 mm OFS nyashka ...
          1. Akim
            Akim 22 January 2014 22: 55
            +1
            Quote: anarky
            Well, now it seems like a trend is such that promising armored vehicles should hold 30mm in the forehead

            This is a BT shell. BOPS from Bushmaster, penetrates 100-mm homogeneous armor of the T-54/55 tank.

            Here is the one with the plastic cap.
            1. anarky
              anarky 22 January 2014 23: 18
              0
              Well, it means that Bahchi definitely has no problems with the defeat of mild BBT wink However, for fortifications and infantry it is better to have 100mm IMHO in the appendage. The problem is only with the defeat of tanks, which can be solved by installing a pair of the same Cornets from the outside. Although I'm afraid it will come out pretty expensive together.

              PS: I wonder if it is possible to make a 100-mm ATGM SAM system for firing at helicopters.
              1. Akim
                Akim 23 January 2014 00: 10
                +1
                Quote: anarky
                I wonder if it is possible to make a 100-mm ATGM SAM system for firing at helicopters.

                Can. You just need a special rocket that flies at supersonic speed. The approach of such a missile is calculated not in two tens of seconds, but in five.
                For example, KB Luch created such a missile defense system, in the "Barrier" container.
                Anti-aircraft guided missile "R-2i"
                PURPOSE:
                SAM is designed to engage air targets such as aircraft, helicopter, UAV and ground targets such as BMP, BTR.

                A feature of the SAM is high accuracy and noise immunity.
                TECH SPECS:

                Maximum firing range, m:
                - during the daytime 8000
                - at night 8000

                Guidance system
                by laser beam with automatic target tracking

                Warhead:
                - a type
                High-explosive fragmentation with a shock core
                1. anarky
                  anarky 23 January 2014 00: 27
                  0
                  Yes, I saw at Andrei_bt. Although in general there is very little information in the internet. Just do not understand the meaning of supersonic. Where does the pinwheel go? A bounce attack is certainly fast, but not so fast. Especially if the turntable uses laser-guided ATGMs. And this is still 130mm from the container, and not from the cannon-launcher.
      2. SkiF_RnD
        SkiF_RnD 23 January 2014 19: 14
        0
        In addition to ATGMs, 100-mm high-explosive shells are also not optimal weapons for infantry fighting vehicles.

        The fact is that the 125-mm cannon of a tank (which can fire with HEs similar in design) is intended primarily for fire with subcaliber projectiles, for hitting tanks (by its very design), and for hitting fortified objects, infantry and unarmored vehicles is used insofar as since it is not a good idea to place a second gun in a tank, and it simply will not work to fire a "crowbar" from a howitzer. And the tank must hit all these targets. It turns out that the priority target is armored vehicles.

        At the same time, a long-barreled gun is not an optimal means for using OFs. Detonation fragments fly apart for the most part away from the projectile flight path. That is, when the RP breaks in an open area (both tank and BMPs), many fragments will go to the sides, and for the gap and in front of it there will be an almost dead zone.

        A suitable tool is a howitzer. Shells fall along a steep trajectory and the fragmentation of fragments will be optimal. Putting on a BMP long-barreled gun for firing OFs is not very advisable. But the automatic grenade launcher is much better. At medium distances, it is much more effective against manpower, and ammunition is simpler and cheaper. So my opinion is a quick-shooter (25-40mm) + good, serious ATGM, even if the Cornet + 40mm automatic grenade launcher. The 100-mm cannon looks, of course, spectacular, but for the BMP is not suitable. hi
  19. Aaron Zawi
    Aaron Zawi 22 January 2014 23: 46
    +1
    I really like the module. Such would be on "Namer" and "Akhzarit" repeat , but our generals stubbornly do not want to make an analogue of infantry fighting vehicles from armored personnel carriers. request
    1. anarky
      anarky 23 January 2014 00: 09
      0
      Well, apparently they do not need ATGMs to drive the bearded. you shoot them well with UAVs am
  20. bublic82009
    bublic82009 23 January 2014 00: 09
    -1
    there are a couple of drawbacks all the optics are poorly placed. give it a turn and the car is blind! missiles are also poorly protected. and so the idea is not what. You can strengthen the armor protection of those places where the crew will be located.
  21. Bosk
    Bosk 25 January 2014 01: 44
    0
    It’s time to raise the gun 30 mm to 40-50 mm, because 30 mm is developed almost to the limit ... the prospect is urgently needed, otherwise we’ll wake up to catch up again.
    1. Prager
      Prager 31 October 2014 14: 29
      0
      I absolutely agree with you to the last word.
  22. Realist1989
    Realist1989 15 March 2014 23: 02
    0
    I wonder how much this module will weigh. Looking back at other combat modules (Ukrainian for example), one can assume that one and a half tons are probably less than the "Berezhok", and even less so than the 4-5-ton "Bakhcha-U" ... which means that due to this gain in weight can increase the protection of the machine. Of course, a grenade launcher would not be superfluous, and probably adding it at the request of the military from the aft side of the module, as on the "Berezhka", will not be a problem for developers. The caliber of the gun in the next 10 years will most likely become insufficient, but in such a mass and size it should fit only a small ammunition load for the 40-mm AP - 120-150 rounds, which is probably not enough. So, IMHO, the developers went along the optimal way of balancing the parameters of the equipment - in comparison with the BMP-3, they slightly reduced the firepower in order to increase the parameters of protection, habitability conditions and the number of troops in return. good