US Army restores BMD Bradley capabilities

60
US Army restores BMD Bradley capabilities

The basic version of the BMD M2A3 Bradley of the US Army without a mounted dynamic protection

The recent decision of the US Army to suspend its ambitious ground combat vehicle GCV (Ground Combat Vehicle) program for three or four years means that the Bradley family of machines should remain in operation much longer than expected.

At the same time, the army is exploring several proposals for technical changes in Engineering Change Proposals (ECP) in order to restore the capabilities of some platforms. In January 2014, some ambiguous progress towards this goal is noted in the annual report of the Office of Performance Testing and Evaluation.

BAE Systems, as a manufacturer of original equipment, received an ECP contract in 2011 after the second tranche of financing for upgrading 55 million dollars; The total amount of payments before July 2017 is estimated at potentially 237 million dollars. This proposal includes research, development, testing and evaluation.

A representative of the ground forces headquarters at a conference in Rome at the end of 2013 of the year emphasized that some of the ECPs were already being implemented.
When the Bradley BMP entered service in the 1983 year, it had a combat mass of 24,5 tons, but since then the mass of the machine has increased significantly. The Bradley M2A BMP reached tons of 33, the weight of the M2A2 variant for “Desert Storm” was 34 tons, and the current version of the M2A3 became heavier to 39,5 tons.

Such a gradual increase in the combat mass is the result of the installation of additional subsystems, especially armor, in order to increase the levels of protection against fire of medium-caliber guns, mines, and anti-tank guns. weapons and the modern "scourge" of vehicles - improvised explosive devices (IEDs). This additional armor included active and passive solutions and urban survival kits BUSK (Bradley Urban Survivability Kit) I, II, and III, as well as improvements in crew resilience.

All of these additional protection measures reduced the vehicle's ground clearance and led to a loss of maximum speed, an increase in braking distance and a decrease in the range of travel, while reducing the service life of the suspension and the tracks.

In addition, the installation of additional electronic systems, including new IED silencers, led to a significant increase in power consumption for Bradley’s BMPs. In turn, this reduced the duration of “silent observation” to 15 minutes, after which it was necessary to start the engine. Also, large power consumption often became the cause of permanent blocking of the tower, increasing the temperature inside the machine, machine operators had to introduce additional system control mode when some components were turned off so that others could work.

The installation of new subsystems, for example, mine seats, anti-radio-controlled IEDs (CREW) systems, systems to reduce heat dissipation, additional communication equipment and protection of the ammunition, “ate” all the valuable internal space of the machine.

Reduced Ammo

As a result, all these innovations have reduced the amount of ammunition storage available, so six shell boxes for ATK Armament Systems' M25 242-mm cannon, five boxes with 7,62-mm cartridges and two boxes with 5,56-cartridges were removed.

Even in this case, the limits for mass, power consumption and cooling in the current configuration have already been reached and the ECP 1 proposal is aimed at reducing Bradley's excess mass, while the ECP 2 will include modifications to the power supply and engine.

According to the proposal of the ECP 1, modernization in the field of mobility includes the installation of heavy torsion shafts, upgraded final gearboxes, tracks with an extended service life, upgraded shock absorbers and balancers of the road wheels.

It is assumed that the machines will also receive improved mine bottom protection. The January report on performance testing and evaluation states: “The previous tests of the US Army BUSK I, II and III kits and the supplementary booking kit (currently part of the M2A3 configuration) were unsatisfactory. In addition, tests in 2012 showed great vulnerability of the crew and the machine itself. "
However, the report notes: “The results of the third explosive test of the lower part of the hull in June 2013 of the year showed that significant improvements in the protection of the Bradley BMP systems are quite possible. Additional tests are needed to further refine and evaluate the proposed modifications in the field of survivability. "

In particular, the results of the third explosive test showed that the level of survivability of a promising multi-purpose armored vehicle (AMPV) is achievable for a platform like Bradley, which is one of the contenders for compliance with the requirements of the American army to replace the currently deployed M113A3 FOV.



Perspective multi-purpose armored vehicle (AMPV) on the Bradley platform

In addition, the report states that the approach to testing the lower part of the body needs to be updated in order to meet the realistic types of threats that are most often found in theaters. All test methods must be radically changed compared to the current approach, which can only confirm that the design meets the “outdated” machine requirements.

Further, this should lead to the development of an integrated test and assessment regime “as soon as the design of the improvement package has been determined”.
In the middle of 2013, explosive tests of the version M2A2 ODS, modified in the troop compartment, were carried out with the aim of representing the M2A3 infantry fighting vehicle with components of the 1 ECP. The car also carried out the proposed modifications of the additional booking of the bottom, the floor of the troop compartment and the placement of the combat pack.

The Performance Test and Evaluation Directorate approved a detailed test plan for the third explosive test under the Bradley head, which is part of the mandatory live firing and evaluation stage.

In addition to the elements of direct protection, the development team also seeks to solve mobility problems associated with overweight by increasing the power of the machine.

According to the ECP plan, the output power of the Cummins diesel engine can be increased to 675 hp. (with growth to 800 hp in the long term), an automatic transmission L-3 Combat Propulsion Systems is installed in order to cope with the added power. In order to improve the efficiency of the cooling system also needs to be improved.

Regarding the modernization of power supply systems and power consumption, the machine will receive a generator with enhanced 600 Amp characteristics, a power distribution system, common programmable displays, an improved rotating tower contact device, an improved Ethernet switch, and Victory computer architecture standards.

Bradley communication capabilities will also be upgraded. A new military tactical communications system, Warfighter Information Network (WIN), Joint Tactical Radio System (JTRS) and JBCP (Joint Battle Command-Platform) software, will be installed on the machine. The CREW system will be replaced with a completely new system. However, all this in turn will increase the mass, energy consumption, will require additional power for cooling and data processing for the machine as a whole.

This work on the plan should be carried out on other members of the Bradley family, who already have a high level of uniformity. For example, the reconnaissance combat vehicle M3 CFV has the same main armament as the BMP variant, the hull, the turret, and the chassis; the differences are related only to the tasks performed. As expected, ECP offers will also be implemented on the M2A3 Bradley, M3A3 CFV and the Bradley fire support vehicle.

Other systems that can be installed on the Bradley machine include the newest mounted armor, shot detection system and built-in training systems installed in the crew compartment.


The reconnaissance vehicle M3A3 also received additional armor protection for the hull and turret, which significantly increased its mass.

Materials used:
www.janes.com
www.baesystems.com
Our news channels

Subscribe and stay up to date with the latest news and the most important events of the day.

60 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +5
    3 October 2014 11: 26
    Watch the 1998 Pentagon Wars movie about the creation of Bradley laughing . It's a funny comedy, but there's no smoke without fire ...
  2. +8
    3 October 2014 12: 08
    And why do they need them? Or the same story as ukrov pulls from stocks the last stocks:
  3. +3
    3 October 2014 12: 08
    IMHO for a 30-40 ton BMP, 25-30 mm as the main armament is just ridiculous. Even the BMP-3m luminaire with a forehead projection from 300 meters holds 30 mm. Made of BMP - TBMP without weapons.
    1. +1
      5 October 2014 19: 38
      American 25-mmki penetrate much better than our 30-ok, which are hardly better than 12,7.
  4. +4
    3 October 2014 12: 25
    Quote: CruorVult
    IMHO for a 30-40 ton BMP, 25-30 mm as the main armament is just ridiculous. Made of BMP - TBMP without weapons.

    No, damn it’s better to put a 152mm gun, and the infantry will run behind ... Oh, shit, this is a tank laughing

    Quote: CruorVult

    Even the BMP-3m luminaire with a forehead projection from 300 meters holds 30 mm.

    In your fantasy land? Therefore, in other places it is sounded as "bulletproof". By the way, how many BMP-3Ms are there in the troops?
    1. +3
      3 October 2014 12: 49
      The bottom line is different, firstly, any modern armored personnel carrier in the maximum reservation holds a 30mm forehead, and secondly, overweight, you need to set goals and objectives adequately so that the car doesn’t jump to 24 from 39t, what’s interesting with the suspension, thirdly, BMP -3m will come this year and next.
      Ours doesn’t stand still, on the BMP-ЗМ complexes of active protection arena-e and eb, spaced steel armor.
      1. +3
        3 October 2014 13: 34
        US Army restores BMD Bradley capabilities

        BAE from "BMP Bradley" converted, mainly into armored personnel carriers ...

        BMP "BMP Bradley", in my opinion is not the most successful of the Western BMP !!!
        1. wanderer_032
          0
          3 October 2014 19: 10
          Quote: mimo-crock3
          No, damn it’s better to put a 152mm gun, and the infantry will run behind ..


          Our engineers put as many as two guns on the BMP-3 and BMD-4 (100-mm and 30-mm) and the infantry did not run from behind, but landed from there from the vehicles.
          And all nishtyak.
          At the same time, our cars are also floating, and one of them can be parachuted.
          With our machines of this class can hardly compete with anything and this is a fact.
          1. +3
            3 October 2014 23: 04
            Quote: wanderer_032
            landing from there from cars.
            And all nishtyak.

            what nishtyak ...
            after a march of 100 cells ... from BMP-3, the soldier must be carried out on a stretcher ... or as always on armor !!!
            for the Vietnamese, have they done such a tiny and close BEFORE ... what GO-FROM will sit there ???all for armor !!!
            1. +2
              3 October 2014 23: 11
              are we going to get a real IFV, with anti-shell armor, that would act along with tanks, on the line, touching the enemy, and destroy, along with the BMP landing force and a 30-mm cannon, all tank-dangerous targets ...

              it is not clear why BMP with bulletproof booking ???
            2. +1
              4 October 2014 00: 43
              There were also claims on reloading 30mm guns.
  5. +3
    3 October 2014 14: 07
    Quote: CruorVult
    The bottom line is different, firstly, any modern armored personnel carrier 30mm forehead

    Firstly, BMP-2 \ 3 can somehow keep their own ancient shells from 2a42, then the western ones make their way from the 80s.
    Secondly, similar western cars weigh about the same. Despite the fact that they keep onboard KPVT (the latest cougars and 30mm to the side), and the future BMP-3m is only 12,7 mm. What can we say about the massive bmp (d) -2 \ 3 cardboard boxes.
    1. +1
      3 October 2014 15: 33
      Quote: mimo-crock3
      Secondly, similar Western cars and weigh about the same

      Combat weight, t:
      28,5 Marder 1
      33,5 Marder 1A3
      22,8 Bradley M2A1
      36,9 Bradley M2A3
      25,4 Warrior
      18,7 BMP-3
      14,0 BMP-2
      Something unlike them to weigh the same.
      1. +2
        3 October 2014 18: 47
        Minimum armor protection with which you can
        go into battle on BMP - "level of protection against RPG-7".
        Everything below this is caterpillar coffins.
        The weight of the machine will inevitably increase to 35 - 40 tons.
        So look at the weight - who is inside and who is not.
        1. +1
          3 October 2014 19: 12
          The problem is that the M2 armor does not protect against the PG-7V, not to mention more modern shots. They initially had to be designed with such armor, and not to weigh an unfortunate 23-ton BMP. Here the Jews approached the problem from the other side - their infantry fighting vehicles and armored personnel carriers are made on the basis of tanks.
          1. +1
            3 October 2014 20: 29
            Quote: the47th
            to weigh an unfortunate 23-ton BMP. Here the Jews approached the problem from the other side - their infantry fighting vehicles and armored personnel carriers are made on the basis of tanks.

            but here, just do not ... about the genius of the Jews ... they are good fellows, what is at hand, they modernize !!!

            BTR M 133, modernized, is involved in all stripping of the Gaza Strip ...
        2. wanderer_032
          0
          3 October 2014 19: 39
          Quote: voyaka uh
          Minimum armor protection with which you can
          go into battle on BMP - "level of protection against RPG-7".
          Everything below this is caterpillar coffins.
          The weight of the machine will inevitably increase to 35 - 40 tons.
          So look at the weight - who is inside and who is not.


          It depends on who is going to fight and how.
          The lighter and lower the car, the harder it is to get into it. Because such a quality as mobility for armored vehicles of any class is an important indicator.
          In addition to the fact that Russian cars are more mobile and maneuverable, they are also equipped with KOEP, which minimizes the enemy’s chance to cover them from the first shot.
          In modern combat, whoever is more mobile has a better chance of winning.
          1. 0
            3 October 2014 21: 39
            Quote: wanderer_032
            It depends on who is going to fight and how.

            good evening Alexander hi
            with modern weapons ... this is not critical ...
            the main thing is thermal imaging and radar invisibility ..

            all these armored personnel carriers / bmp-ts, for urban combat sweeps ...
            Were the militia Mk-4 and BTR-T. HAVE long been, the airport was occupied without such losses !!!
          2. +2
            3 October 2014 23: 56
            "In modern combat, the one who is more mobile has a better chance of winning" /////

            Israeli tankers did NOT come to this conclusion.
            According to the experiences of battles with Soviet equipment in the 60-80s
            the conclusion was: do not scamper on the battlefield, shoot from the spot with
            extreme distances and be booked "for the most tomatoes."

            So everyone has their own experience.
            1. +1
              4 October 2014 00: 43
              Quote: voyaka uh
              Israeli tankers did NOT come to this conclusion.
              According to the experiences of battles with Soviet equipment in the 60-80s


              to this conclusion, the fascists came in 41-42 years in the Second World War, therefore, the "Tigers" and "Panthers" appeared with a disgusting chassis ... but with excellent optics and 88 ((88-mm cannon KwK 36 L / 56 mm) )) and 75 (((75-mm cannon KwK 42 L / 70,)))) cannons ...
              1. 0
                10 October 2017 22: 38
                The result of the conclusions of the Nazis is known. The conclusions of the Israelis are also mixed. The technique of Jews for a particular area and a specific enemy. In another place, the result would be categorically different. By the way, not with Soviet technology, but with Arabic. although made in the Union. Maybe with Soviet technology and the conclusions would be completely different
            2. 0
              5 October 2014 19: 53
              Such cars are needed, but for the assault on cities or SDs. Near Lugansk, the Armed Forces of Ukraine used to transfer cargo to the BMP several times across the river due to buoyancy, their small mass and mobility played positively during the counter-offensive of the militia, where not every 30 bridge holds tons.
      2. +2
        4 October 2014 00: 51
        "Small" error laughing
        40 tons, IMHO for such a machine bust.

        And who keeps something on board, the difference in design time in a quarter century affects.
        Now the materials and technology are somewhat different.

        In Syria, judging by "Anna-News", mechanized guides do not believe in armor, but in speed with maneuverability.
    2. wanderer_032
      +1
      3 October 2014 19: 28
      Quote: mimo-crock3
      Firstly, BMP-2 \ 3 can somehow keep their own ancient shells from 2a42, then the western ones make their way from the 80s.
      Secondly, similar western cars weigh about the same. Despite the fact that they keep onboard KPVT (the latest cougars and 30mm to the side), and the future BMP-3m is only 12,7 mm. What can we say about the massive bmp (d) -2 \ 3 cardboard boxes.


      All our infantry fighting vehicles and infantry fighting vehicles are lightly armored class armored vehicles and are designed to deliver motorized rifles to the front line and fire support in combat from distances that their weapon systems are designed for, and not to allow them to break through a deeply echeloned defense face-to-face.
      The armament of our modern infantry fighting vehicles and infantry fighting vehicles can, if necessary, turn any NATO machine of the same class from its 100-mm guns into a pile of metal, and they can do this from a distance from which the NATO BMPs with their automatic guns are unlikely to get it.
      Unless the ATGM, but the ATGMs and our boxes are launched through the barrel of a 100-mm gun.
      So who is who, another big question.
      In addition, our cars are noticeably smaller in size, especially in height.
      And our surveillance and aiming equipment is also at a good level on machines of this class.
      1. +1
        3 October 2014 19: 59
        Quote: wanderer_032
        and are designed to deliver motorized rifles to the forefront

        Rather from the forefront and beyond
        1. +3
          3 October 2014 20: 47
          Quote: Spade
          Rather from the forefront and beyond

          That's right BTR-T, armored infantry, directly in the urban area !!!
          1. wanderer_032
            +1
            3 October 2014 21: 01
            Quote: cosmos111
            that's right btr-t


            Such vehicles are intended for carrying out assault operations and for street battles in military units, i.e. for very limited use.
            If it makes sense in the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation to create units with such equipment, then it is better to send it to the engineering troops for specialized assault battalions, as well as the BMPT. Which must be in such battalions.
            In motorized rifle troops they will be a burden.
            Such assault battalions can be seconded if necessary to motorized rifle units, giving them operational subordination to the commander of the motorized rifle brigade for the duration of the assault operations.
            I suppose that this will be more rational, because overcoming fortifications and fortifications, the work of engineering troops.
            According to the experience of the Second World War. The assault on Kinegsberg, Berlin, etc. operations.
            1. 0
              3 October 2014 21: 55
              Quote: wanderer_032
              If it makes sense in the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation to create units with such equipment, then it is better to send it to the engineering troops for specialized assault battalions, as well as the BMPT.

              logical: the main thing is that they were ...
              in Tsakhal, BTR_T, also operate in conjunction with the engineer units ...
              sappers, paving the way, the infantry of the Tsahal and tanks ....


              sapper BTR-T "Nagmachon"
        2. wanderer_032
          +1
          3 October 2014 20: 48
          Quote: Spade
          Rather from the forefront and beyond


          In which direction did you mean? laughing
          1. +1
            3 October 2014 21: 52
            Towards Brest. French BMP rather cars for the development of success.

            BMP-3 in general in its pure form. Therefore, there is even a toilet in it so that the fighters do not crawl out onto the area infected after tactical nuclear strikes. And by the way, all the shortcomings of this machine as a linear one, designed to break through the defense, become advantages if you treat it, namely, as a machine for the development of success.
            For example, the inconvenience of landing from it. Yes, as a "breakthrough BMP" it is clearly inconvenient. Jumping out of it on the line of dismounting under enemy fire is a dubious pleasure. But the location of the landing force close to the center of mass increases comfort, and they should not have dismounted under fire. Get there, stop, take up defense, ensure the movement of those who follow them.
            1. 0
              3 October 2014 23: 20
              South Korean BMP K-21 - floating infantry fighting vehicle weighing 30 tons ..
              considered the best in the world, in a combination of armor and mobility ...

              but the fighting compartment with benches, instead of mine arms, looks ARCHAIC ... Koreans didn’t finish it !!!
              клик
              1. +1
                5 October 2014 10: 31
                And you are aware that the Koreans are disgraced with this BMP and it is not truly accepted for service. They even put several people there because of rubbing the points of the admissions committee. The fact is that during the final tests, several samples were banally sunk. When analyzing flights, it turned out that it would never sail. In general, Koreans have all the best in the world and a tank, and bmp, and sau. lol
                1. 0
                  5 October 2014 12: 49
                  Quote: 1c-inform-city
                  In general, Koreans have all the best in the world, and a tank, and bmp, and sau

                  I don’t know what is the best, I have a Samsung phone ...
                  tank, not accepted into service, and BMP K-21, one of the best in the world ...
                  155 mm ACS K9 "Thunder" (Thunder) - superior, in terms of firing range and rate of fire, domestic counterparts ... 152 mm ACS Msta-S ....
            2. 0
              10 October 2017 22: 56
              BMP-3 alteration of an unsuccessful light tank. She could not be a good transport for the infantry. Squeezed out of the design, of course to the maximum, but still the design is not for BMP. So far, no one has created the ideal (and simply the best) BMP. There the armor is bad, there is a cannon, there ischo ischi something wrong. Bradley is no better and no worse than others. They started to make a wunderwafle out of a mediocre, well-balanced machine and got what they got. here are trying to redo
      2. +2
        4 October 2014 00: 08
        The problem is that on the BMP you often need to drive through the terrain,
        teeming with grenade launchers in green. And here
        that 100 mm gun, that 200 mm will not help. Side grenade -
        no infantry squad.
        A TBTR with a 12,7 mm machine gun, like Namer, will pass quietly. And further
        and grenade launchers slant.
        1. +1
          4 October 2014 01: 04
          Well, your TVD has not changed much for many years.
          In Russia, possible future theater of operations is somewhat more diverse and it is problematic to have special equipment for both the taiga and the British seas.

          Although the idea stated above about special assault units, IMHO, makes sense. In the Second World War, such units were and acted successfully.
        2. 0
          4 October 2014 01: 05
          or modernization with additional reservation ...
          IFV Close Combat Vehicle - modernized BM "Marder" ...
        3. wanderer_032
          0
          5 October 2014 10: 45
          Quote: voyaka uh
          The problem is that on the BMP you often need to drive through the terrain,
          teeming with grenade launchers in green.


          Then tell me please why the hell then feed the intelligence and equip the scouts with modern technology and cf-you?
          Why, then, send patrols forward and to the flanks if your main forces are hit by an ambush?
          Such "scouts" and "patrols" should be placed under a tribunal, and only because they do not fulfill the tasks assigned to them to detect enemy forces and weapons on the routes of the main forces.
          In addition, in addition to basic reconnaissance, engineering reconnaissance (the presence of mines, artificial and natural obstacles, etc.) and artillery (identifying the main forces, firing points and enemy forces in the direction of movement, etc. etc., with their subsequent suppression or destruction by artillery fire).
  6. 0
    3 October 2014 14: 24
    Touches recoillers, under the tracks "Bradley", in the first photo. soldier
  7. 0
    3 October 2014 15: 14
    In any case, 25 mm look dumb on a 40 ton machine. In a neighboring article they write about an English warrior with a 40 mm cannon and some cool shells. And here is 25 mm. Stupidly. Yes, more ammunition with 25 mm shells but they will have to spend more. And in order to hit BMP 3 on board, you still have to go to this side at a distance of defeat. And given that she will not be there alone but with tanks, it will not be easy. In such a situation, the presence of at least 40 mm gun warms the soul of the BMP commander. And 25 mm is a frightening scare, it is unlikely to help survive.
    1. 0
      3 October 2014 23: 59
      And what do you say about the 50 ton Namer with heavy
      a machine gun? wink
      1. +1
        4 October 2014 01: 12
        Well, this is an armored personnel carrier, for shooting "Indians" with a shaitan-pipe is enough. Moreover, 7,62 will be more than half an inch stronger. It is unlikely that he will have to converge with tanks head-on.

        And its mass depends mainly on the "parent" base.
        Would design separately, would be easier.
        1. 0
          4 October 2014 12: 39
          You see, the Russian "shaitan pipe", alas, is still beating in the side
          any modern Russian tank ... Therefore, I would not
          neglected protection from her, especially if you are going to
          transport an entire infantry squad.
          You believe that it is technically impossible to install on Namer
          uninhabited turret with guns and ATGMs, like on BMP-3 or Terminator?
          Israel produces such tower stations.
          They didn’t do this on purpose so that the commander of a combat vehicle would not
          there was a bad temptation to fight with the tank. And put at risk
          10 people of infantry. Met with a tank - backing up and in cover,
          infantry - scattered and to the ground.
          1. 0
            4 October 2014 18: 51
            Quote: voyaka uh
            You believe that it is technically impossible to install on Namer
            uninhabited turret with guns and ATGMs, like on BMP-3 or Terminator?


            but light infantry fighting vehicles / armored personnel carriers are also needed in "light brigades, floating ...
            but just not some assault operations ... for this they are light infantry fighting vehicles, not designed ...
            and of course, modernization, with improved protection !!!

            BMP-2M
            1. 0
              4 October 2014 19: 06
              Here is another modernization of the BMP-2, the Czech company Excalibur Army ...
              combat module with KPVT, quite enough for an armored personnel carrier !!!
              клик

  8. Florist
    0
    3 October 2014 17: 03
    And who can tell, in the main photo for the article on the starboard side of Bradley there is a plate with inclined horizontal stripes, it still stands out in color. The same is often on board the tower of Abrams. What is this element of armor protection? Or some sort of spare parts?
    1. +2
      3 October 2014 18: 51
      This is the radiator of an additional cooling system
    2. +1
      4 October 2014 01: 17
      Not a radiator, but a type of "friend or foe" transponder in the infrared range. Introduced, IMHO for the first time in Bosnia, after heavy losses of NATO members from its own aviation. In aiming systems it looks like a contrasting "cold" spot against the background of a heated environment.
      1. 0
        4 October 2014 18: 56
        on CV-90, installed, also such a system ...
        the best BMP "classic" in the world ...
  9. 0
    3 October 2014 17: 11
    Quote: the47th

    Combat weight, t:
    28,5 Marder 1 which in the Bundeswehr were transferred to more modern modifications
    33,5 Marder 1A3
    22,8 Bradley M2A1 which are transferred to more modern modifications in the US Army
    36,9 Bradley M2A3
    25,4 Warrior
    18,7 BMP-3 western, yeah
    14,0 BMP-2 western, yeah (2)

    Hmm
    1. 0
      4 October 2014 19: 14
      BMD Bradley M2A1 in Iraq ...
      клик
  10. wanderer_032
    0
    3 October 2014 20: 24
    Promising multi-purpose armored vehicle (AMPV) on the Bradley platform (quote from the photo caption)

    It seems that Americans are rushing between the two variants of BMP.
    One with good protection and mobility, but with more modest armament mounted on the DBM, such as a 12.7-mm machine gun M-2 or 40-mm AG M-19 and a normal landing capacity.
    Another one, with more powerful armament (25-mm autocannon M-242 "Bushmaster" and ATGM "TOU") and enhanced protection, but with a smaller landing capacity.
    It seems that they are even before our engineers from Volgograd and Kurgan, as to China on foot. laughing
    1. wanderer_032
      0
      3 October 2014 20: 37
      Something inspired by the article ...
      Probably what the Americans do, it turns out according to their plans ... laughing

    2. 0
      3 October 2014 21: 56
      Because now they have to cram three motorized infantry squads into four cars. What is not good.
      1. The comment was deleted.
      2. 0
        3 October 2014 22: 54
        in the same place the capacity (((BMP- "Bradley" 6 people and then in raskaryachku laughing ...

        modernized BAE Systems BMP "Bradley" -M2A2 and M2A3 ...
  11. 0
    3 October 2014 21: 32
    Why is this car so tall? Yankees in a tank go to full height?)))
  12. padonok.71
    +1
    4 October 2014 00: 26
    Our BMPshi / BTRe (partly BMDshki), like campers, can be driven away on a journey, a little wise guy is to drive her to her, sleep in her, well, because of the weather, it’s easy, he’ll stay out, shake the connection. Again, the machine gunner / fluffy, some, but if there is a faq, it will help. And you don’t let her offend, place it correctly, disguise it, it’s necessary - drip it, put a wall of semiprecious stones, lay it out. Defend it from the adversary, you have a lot of FAQs for this, PC, RPGshka, AGSka, right now the GMKs went, AKi, again, from 5 to 12 trunks, 1-2 of them with GPshki. And the machine will play, sing, help you, you just do not be lazy.
    The lazy Angles, Britons and other nonsense, the approach to the infantry machine is completely different. They want to sit in it and only press buttons. And let the car do everything herself. And she defends herself and attacks and hides and searches for enemies. And I will turn gray inside. I’ll hang armor so that not a single tank, not a single RPGshnik gets out. And I won’t go out for anything, it’s cold / hot, flies / mosquitoes, rain / snow, and you can spoil your hair. Nah, no fools coming out.
    I made such conclusions as an old "traveler-traveler" on an armored personnel carrier, 80ke.
    1. 0
      10 October 2017 23: 07
      Full respect! This machine should be considered as an application to the landing, and not as an independent combat unit. By the way, in the Soviet army, apparently not everyone understood this. Often the crews trained separately from the landing
  13. 0
    4 October 2014 14: 54
    Quote: wanderer_032

    All of our BMP and BMD are lightly armored class armored vehicles

    Let's write it down, "funeral box"

    Quote: wanderer_032

    and are intended for delivering motorized rifles to the front line and their fire support in battle from distances that their weapon systems are designed for, and not for them to break through a deeply echeloned defense in the forehead and at point-blank range.

    The deeply echeloned defenses with long and clear front lines ended long ago, only half-educated generals breaking into the forehead and thrust with throwing meat at the enemy. And nowadays the enemy is here, half an hour there ...


    Quote: wanderer_032

    The armament of our modern infantry fighting vehicles and infantry fighting vehicles can, if necessary, turn any NATO machine of the same class from its 100-mm guns into a pile of metal, and they can do this from a distance from which the NATO BMPs with their automatic guns are unlikely to get it.

    What interesting distance do you imagine there? Okay, to hell with him with the "Bushmaster" 25mm is a bit old, but the fresh 30mm cannons of the "Cougars", ASCOD quite penetrate 60mm at 60 degrees. from 2000m. Suspended shooting at 6,5 km? laughing



    Quote: wanderer_032

    In addition, our cars are noticeably smaller in size, especially in height.


    Yeah, to the light tank on which they hung a bunch of weapons, they added a back-and-forth box to the rear and rammed up the infantry there. Great design.

    Quote: wanderer_032

    And our surveillance and aiming equipment is also at a good level on machines of this class.

    Great joke.
    1. wanderer_032
      0
      5 October 2014 22: 15
      Quote: mimo-crock3
      but 30mm fresh guns "Cougars", ASCOD quite penetrate 60mm at 60 degrees. from 2000m.


      If their 30-mm assault rifles have such an effective range of fire, then this is what the Bakhcha-U combat module is approximately capable of:
      Advantages and features of application
      The unique composition of weapons gives ground forces units fundamentally new qualities:
      the all-day combat use;
      firing all types of weapons day and night, from a place, on the move, afloat;
      firing from closed fire positions;
      effective shooting at air targets at the level of specialized anti-aircraft weapons;
      automatic tracking of targets;
      duplication of firing from the commander's place;
      automatic loading of all types of ammunition.
      http://www.kbptula.ru/ru/razrabotki-kbp/kompleksy-vooruzheniya-legkobronirovanno



      j-tekhniki-i-tankov / bakhcha-u


      100-mm shot 3UBK23-3 "Arkan"

      The 9M117M1-3 “Arkan” unitary loading shot with a guided missile is designed to destroy modern tanks equipped with dynamic protection, small targets, as well as low-speed low-flying targets like “hovering helicopter”.
      Main characteristics

      Firing range ............................................... 100-5500 m
      Armor penetration average .................. 700 mm
      Overcoming remote sensing ......................................... provided
      Control system .................................. interference-proof,
      by laser beam
      http://www.kbptula.ru/ru/razrabotki-kbp/kompleksy-vooruzheniya-legkobronirovanno



      j-tekhniki-i-tankov / bakhcha-u

      Those. at least 4 enemy BM units can be detected and destroyed from a distance 2 times the range of their main weapons.
      What are you talking about BMP "Puma" booze?
      Learn mat.chast dvoechnik.
      1. wanderer_032
        0
        5 October 2014 22: 17
        And finally:
        Automatic fire control system
        Provides a significant increase in the effectiveness of weapons in the defeat of the entire range of targets in difficult meteorological and topographic conditions, from the spot, on the move and afloat, day and night at all ranges of weapons.

        Commander's sight
        Provides an effective circular search for targets and duplication of the functions of the gunner commander.
        Main characteristics
        field of view ............................................... 0,9x1,2 / 4,5x6,2 deg.
        range of measured range ........ 200-10000 m.

        Gunner's sight
        Provides shooting with all types of weapons at any time of the day.
        Main characteristics
        daily channel increase ........................ x12 / 2,5
        range of the measured range .............. 200-10000 m.

        http://www.kbptula.ru/ru/razrabotki-kbp/kompleksy-vooruzheniya-legkobronirovanno

        j-tekhniki-i-tankov / bakhcha-u

        All these figures in the performance characteristics are confirmed by a set of rigorous tests.
        So BMP "Puma" and other junk flies like plywood over the Pacific Ocean.
  14. +3
    4 October 2014 15: 00
    Quote: padonok.71

    The lazy Angles, Britons and other nonsense, the approach to the infantry machine is completely different. They want to sit in it and only press buttons. And let the car do everything herself. And she defends herself and attacks and hides and searches for enemies. And I will turn gray inside. I’ll hang armor so that not a single tank, not a single RPGshnik gets out. And I won’t go out for anything, it’s cold / hot, flies / mosquitoes, rain / snow, and you can spoil your hair. Nah, no fools coming out.
    I made such conclusions as an old "traveler-traveler" on an armored personnel carrier, 80ke.

    Whether it’s a matter of Soviet boxes, which are safer to ride on armor than to sit inside. The logic is simple.
    1. 0
      10 October 2017 23: 14
      Himself fought !? He is a tank crew and does not regret it. It’s safer to ride armored in any Bradley Puma. Than do not weigh, and a powerful landmine or petr from ambush definitely bury those inside
  15. +2
    4 October 2014 15: 05
    Quote: wanderer_032
    Promising multi-purpose armored vehicle (AMPV) on the Bradley platform (quote from the photo caption)

    It seems that Americans are rushing between the two variants of BMP.
    One with good protection and mobility, but with more modest armament mounted on the DBM, such as a 12.7-mm machine gun M-2 or 40-mm AG M-19 and a normal landing capacity.
    Another one, with more powerful armament (25-mm autocannon M-242 "Bushmaster" and ATGM "TOU") and enhanced protection, but with a smaller landing capacity.
    It seems that they are even before our engineers from Volgograd and Kurgan, as to China on foot. laughing

    AMPV is a platform for auxiliary vehicles (medical, commander, etc.), because Now this role is played by machines based on the good old M113 and a more recent replacement is required for unification.
  16. +1
    5 October 2014 20: 27
    But what about the mega-machine Stryker? Already everything, back to Bradley back?
    What is the dispute about, can you imagine a car like Namer in our conditions? All of Israel is half of Chechnya. Where did you get so much fuel and spare tracks for such a bandura? You do not forget about the scale.
  17. 0
    6 October 2014 00: 29
    Quote: Maksus
    But what about the mega-machine Stryker?

    Wheel technology does not crowd out tracked vehicles.

    Quote: Maksus

    What is the dispute about, can you imagine a car like Namer in our conditions?


    Quite. Specifically, Nomer certainly does not fit.

    Quote: Maksus

    Where did you get so much fuel and spare tracks for such a bandura?

    Therefore, they ride them on tractors to save motor resources and fuel.
  18. +2
    6 October 2014 12: 45
    Quote: wanderer_032

    "blah blah blah, a lot of scribbling"

    Learn mat.chast dvoechnik.


    Why do you retype agitation word for word? It remains only to find 5 km of line of sight, and 2 km is just a typical line of sight in Europe. The flight speed of the gun is 300 m / s, the speed of the projectiles is ~ 1000 m / s. So think who will destroy whom faster with simultaneous detection and guidance from 2 km (yes, yes, Soviet / Russian electronics with purchased foreign thermal imagers "have no analogue in the world"), while an ATGM will fly for more than 6 seconds, and a bunch of shells from a cannon will fly in 2 seconds and gouges attachments and riddles armor. And of course, "Bradley", "Puma" and other BMPs (not all) also carry guns. Only now the new TOW-2, Spike-LR can reliably hit more or less modern grows. tanks, but "Arkan" with a penetration of 700mm - of course not. Here is the answer: a BMP-3 can knock out an enemy BMP only with an ATGM, an enemy BMP will not even spend an ATGM - a standard autocannon is enough. You are our excellent student, senior assistant to the political instructor laughing.
  19. +1
    6 October 2014 13: 05
    PS But they forgot about the most important thing, that the main task of the BMP is to transport the infantry intact and support it a little with fire, but the fans of the Soviet BMP-3 cannot sit still and let's measure their weapons systems. In fact, it turns out that in this task, too, a machine created according to an absurd concept with an incomprehensible weapon system (no, well, maybe in the 80s it was normal to use Fables to solve enemy М60А3 and early М1, but where to get such rivals now?) western designs. A suitcase without a handle.
  20. 0
    3 November 2014 14: 49
    these cars are armored obesity, like all states. not good. am
  21. 0
    27 November 2014 22: 25
    Quote: Prager
    these cars are armored obesity, like all states. not good. am

    No, just women of modern developed countries suffer from low fertility. The generals did not notice similar trends in the demography of their country and are guided by the idea of ​​easily replaceable personnel.

"Right Sector" (banned in Russia), "Ukrainian Insurgent Army" (UPA) (banned in Russia), ISIS (banned in Russia), "Jabhat Fatah al-Sham" formerly "Jabhat al-Nusra" (banned in Russia) , Taliban (banned in Russia), Al-Qaeda (banned in Russia), Anti-Corruption Foundation (banned in Russia), Navalny Headquarters (banned in Russia), Facebook (banned in Russia), Instagram (banned in Russia), Meta (banned in Russia), Misanthropic Division (banned in Russia), Azov (banned in Russia), Muslim Brotherhood (banned in Russia), Aum Shinrikyo (banned in Russia), AUE (banned in Russia), UNA-UNSO (banned in Russia), Mejlis of the Crimean Tatar people (banned in Russia), Legion “Freedom of Russia” (armed formation, recognized as terrorist in the Russian Federation and banned), Kirill Budanov (included to the Rosfinmonitoring list of terrorists and extremists)

“Non-profit organizations, unregistered public associations or individuals performing the functions of a foreign agent,” as well as media outlets performing the functions of a foreign agent: “Medusa”; "Voice of America"; "Realities"; "Present time"; "Radio Freedom"; Ponomarev Lev; Ponomarev Ilya; Savitskaya; Markelov; Kamalyagin; Apakhonchich; Makarevich; Dud; Gordon; Zhdanov; Medvedev; Fedorov; Mikhail Kasyanov; "Owl"; "Alliance of Doctors"; "RKK" "Levada Center"; "Memorial"; "Voice"; "Person and law"; "Rain"; "Mediazone"; "Deutsche Welle"; QMS "Caucasian Knot"; "Insider"; "New Newspaper"