Military Review

Media: Russian "terminators" would be very useful in Syria

102
The presence of Russian military and Russian military equipment in Syria has become an obvious fact. Besides aviation equipment, reported the presence of weapons of the ground forces, including tanks. Also, according to experts, during the fulfillment of the Syrian mission BMPT Terminator would be very useful. Writes about this Messenger of Mordovia.


Media: Russian "terminators" would be very useful in Syria


After successful trials of the Terminators, decisions were made to adopt them. However, with the arrival of the Serdyukov team in the Defense Ministry, the plans for the purchase of cars have sunk into oblivion. As a result, Kazakhstan became the first country to acquire “Terminators”. After testing them, the military experts of the republic stated that “one BMPT can, in terms of its potential, replace the 2-2,5 BMP or the 3-4 BTR”.



“The Terminator is armed with two 30-mm cannons, a PKTM machine gun, two automatic grenade launchers, guided missiles with various warheads, including a high-explosive and volume-detonating action,” the publication lists the characteristics of the vehicle. “An advanced fire control system with a thermal imaging channel allows you to detect targets day and night, in adverse weather conditions.”



"If we talk about the protection of BMPT, then according to these characteristics, the machine significantly exceeds the Russian main battle tank T-90", - said "Herald".

The BMPT (or, as it is now called, the fire support fighting vehicle) “is capable of effectively fighting the enemy’s manpower and armored vehicles in urban conditions, the desert and the mountains,” and, according to experts, “could be a reliable defense for the Russian units performance of various, including peacekeeping tasks, ”concludes the publication.

Photos used:
http://vestnik-rm.ru/
102 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. sever.56
    sever.56 24 September 2015 12: 09 New
    +19
    And it would be better "Solntsepeki" ... !!!
    Booms - and several hectares of land, absolutely perfectly cleared of ISIS!
    1. ziqzaq
      ziqzaq 24 September 2015 12: 12 New
      +29
      Quote: sever.56
      And it would be better "Solntsepeki" ... !!!

      Both...
      1. boozer
        boozer 24 September 2015 12: 20 New
        +6
        We will see, see, and I think so soon! soldier
      2. Now we are free
        Now we are free 24 September 2015 13: 41 New
        +11
        I envy the white envy of the Kazakh Brothers, since they have already adopted BMPT. wink
        If we talk about Syria, then BMPT there really would be very handy especially BMPT-1 based on the T-90. Unlike the BMPT-2, it has 2 30 mm automatic grenade launchers, and this is a very significant factor for combating enemy infantry + it gives the gunner a module gunner with 2 30 mm cannons to search / fire at targets in the side projections and stern fearing that an RPG-7/29 grenade or a Molotov Cocktail / RKG-3 + might fly into the forehead while it is distracted. It reduces the fatigue of the commander of the gunner of the weapon complex, after all, 10 eyes are better than 6 ...
        Even considering that the potential enemy in the person of ISIS and other US bastards, MBTs do not have many ATGMs, the Terminator will still find use in the form of pillboxes, bunkers, and again MBT of the enemy, which it will destroy from a safe distance for itself. It would be nice for Russia to conclude a contract for the supply of a batch of 10 BMPT + BREM vehicles to Syria, officially, so that the "Probable Partners" do not blather once more. we don’t know who is fighting inside these BMPTs, they are also “Syrian”. laughing A good test by the real war, where the front is a mushy state and a mixed DB theater from the desert to the city ruins (for which the BMPT was actually created), would be welcome. soldier
        1. Dimka off
          Dimka off 25 September 2015 09: 36 New
          +1
          Quote: Now we are free
          since they have already adopted BMPT

          Most likely in this form, BMPT will not be adopted. The new BMPT will be based on Almaty and have a caliber of 57 mm. But there will be two guns or one - a riddle) But in any case, the machine will be more powerful than the current BMPT. Although it would not hurt to buy the old before adopting the new one.
      3. The comment was deleted.
    2. Byshido_dis
      Byshido_dis 24 September 2015 12: 12 New
      +3
      Solntsepeki already there, there were terminators and beeches)
      1. Sharapov
        Sharapov 24 September 2015 12: 48 New
        +8
        And where (and when) they will appear - Terminators - after all, the RF Ministry of Defense did not buy them for military purposes - several copies are stored in the Ryazan military school ..... ("thanks" to Serdyukov - so that he was empty).
        1. self-propelled
          self-propelled 24 September 2015 16: 08 New
          0
          Quote: Sharapov
          And where (and when) they will appear - Terminators - after all, the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation did not purchase them for military purposes

          did not purchase for their aircraft. Well, there are no Russian troops in Syria (officially). and who, where and what is doing (by what forces and methods - we are not supposed to know this (and rightly, as I think)).
      2. BDRM 667
        BDRM 667 24 September 2015 12: 48 New
        +1
        Quote: Byshido_dis
        Solntsepeki already there, there were terminators and beeches)


        And "Buki" is why? Do you assume that the Saudis, Israel, or the United States "with comrades" will climb into the fray?

        Just in case, our fighters are already there, and several MiG31s were handed over to the Syrians ...
      3. The comment was deleted.
    3. vovanpain
      vovanpain 24 September 2015 12: 13 New
      +10
      "Solntsepek" seems to already be there, now in combat conditions we run around the "Terminator"
    4. Fregate
      Fregate 24 September 2015 12: 13 New
      +2
      Quote: sever.56
      And it would be better "Solntsepeki" ... !!!

      Both are even better. wink
    5. Dmitry Toderes
      Dmitry Toderes 24 September 2015 12: 42 New
      +3
      And in the conditions of warfare in residential quarters, where there may be civilians, hiding in the basements of Solntsepeki can not be used. This is where Russian Terminators come in handy.
      1. Lt. Air Force stock
        Lt. Air Force stock 24 September 2015 13: 57 New
        +2
        Syria is a great opportunity to test Russian weapons systems in a combat situation. And Syria would not hurt to accept the CSTO. In general, the CSTO is an excellent vaccine against NATO bombing. If the country is protected, Russia will be able to deploy as much of the military contingent as needed.
    6. sir.jonn
      sir.jonn 24 September 2015 14: 01 New
      +1
      After a tank is fired, the projectile’s area and the tank’s location are enveloped in a dense cloud of dust and smoke. On the one hand, it disguises the car from RPGs and ATGMs, but at the same time it does not allow you to search for targets. “Terminator”, with a thermal imaging sight, could effectively work in tandem with a tank in a similar situation, at the same time covering it when entering a position and moving away after completing a task.
    7. SALLAK
      SALLAK 24 September 2015 14: 51 New
      +1
      Or maybe it's easier, a vigorous charge and silence for years ??? Two different types of weapons! Different tasks! Kindergarten...
    8. Dimka off
      Dimka off 25 September 2015 09: 31 New
      +1
      Quote: sever.56
      And it would be better "Solntsepeki" ... !!!
      Booms - and several hectares of land, absolutely perfectly cleared of ISIS!

      Solntsepeki most likely already exist there.
  2. maks-101
    maks-101 24 September 2015 12: 10 New
    +12
    Serdyuk on the count must be planted.
    1. twincam
      twincam 24 September 2015 12: 17 New
      +7
      I support your constructive opinion)))
      1. vorobey
        vorobey 24 September 2015 12: 25 New
        +5
        Quote: maks-xnumx
        Serdyuk on the count must be planted.

        Quote: twincam
        I support your constructive opinion)))


        and hammer a nail in the head so that it does not come off ..
        1. Sars
          Sars 24 September 2015 12: 37 New
          0
          They write that Serdyukov fulfilled Putin’s special task - to create an opinion among Americans about the complete collapse of the PBC, for which he received a star of the hero.
        2. Sars
          Sars 24 September 2015 12: 37 New
          0
          They write that Serdyukov fulfilled Putin’s special task - to create an opinion among Americans about the complete collapse of the PBC, for which he received a star of the hero.
          1. demon1978
            demon1978 24 September 2015 12: 53 New
            +5
            Quote: SarS
            They write that Serdyukov performed a special task of Putin


            Aha yes , and Vasiliev and co. provided financial cover fellow

            I already wrote on this occasion that the first will soon be appointed to agricultural, and the second to the auto industry or medicine. yes So in twenty years, they will become cooler than Leonid Ilyich, and they will “lift up” the whole economy and take it to the Swiss Bank, with such and such talents hi
            Glory to domestic heroes !!!!Glory to domestic heroes !!!!
            1. ROD VDVshny
              ROD VDVshny 24 September 2015 13: 00 New
              +2
              Quote: demon1978
              , and Vasiliev and co. provided financial cover
    2. roi2009
      roi2009 24 September 2015 13: 55 New
      +1
      yv then he did not put his own
  3. The comment was deleted.
  4. inkass_98
    inkass_98 24 September 2015 12: 13 New
    +1
    Such a machine can come in handy wherever we are, let’s not hint where exactly.
    And for myself it would not hurt to buy.
  5. tomket
    tomket 24 September 2015 12: 13 New
    0
    a significant minus is the limited missile ammunition. and a gatling gun would be suitable for such a technique. for long-term shooting without overheating of the trunks.
    1. Pacifist
      Pacifist 24 September 2015 12: 18 New
      +5
      And to carry a trailer with ammunition on a trailer? No, really. The designers thought it all right. For urban battles, that’s it. And the fire is balanced and everything is normal with protection. What is really needed is a programmable detonation according to target designation. Then generally krants perfume.
      1. Rader
        Rader 24 September 2015 12: 27 New
        +9
        Actually, so many different things were said about BMPT, as a class of equipment (both good and bad), that to sort out the question: "is such a technique needed at all?" only by results combat application. So in Syria it would not hurt to look at this car in action b.
        1. Pacifist
          Pacifist 24 September 2015 12: 40 New
          +1
          Absolutely agree. In addition, it is necessary for Syria, as part of a combat audit, to simply present the heels of the second terminators as combat testing. And we are tested and help them.
      2. The comment was deleted.
    2. avt
      avt 24 September 2015 12: 21 New
      +1
      Quote: tomket
      . and a gatling gun would be suitable for such a technique.

      request laughing Well, just look how during it ,, Volcano "we tried to stick as much in the 70s on a tank chassis. Then exactly about
      Quote: tomket
      for long-term shooting without overheating of the trunks.

      You won’t speak. Yes, and about
      Quote: tomket
      a significant minus is the limited missile ammunition.

      Forgetting it, considering the consumption of shells. Only I detract from it - no need for ,, short bursts "and a decrease in the rate of fire of a ,, gun like Gatling"
    3. demon1978
      demon1978 24 September 2015 13: 07 New
      +1
      Quote: tomket
      a significant minus is the limited missile ammunition.


      And what, all (or at least partially) ISIS burns in tanks ??? !!! request

      “The Terminator is armed with two 30 mm cannons, a PKTM machine gun, two automatic grenade launchers,

      For manpower and lightly armored vehicles, where it’s enough (IHMO), although landmines and voluminous vehicles are also not superfluous, but you should also see the edges request
  6. Izotovp
    Izotovp 24 September 2015 12: 14 New
    +5
    Sunshine is also good, but it’s a weapon by area, and the BMPT is a surgeon. At least a couple in Syria need to test the concept in real conditions. Maybe a 30-mm gun will not be enough in those conditions, you have to put 57.
    1. tomket
      tomket 24 September 2015 12: 16 New
      +1
      Quote: Izotovp
      Maybe the 30-mm gun will not be enough in those conditions, you have to put 57.

      30 mm. it is against the infantry. nevertheless, it was planned that they would operate in the same order as tanks. and in which case the tank can close up 125mm shell.
      1. pilot8878
        pilot8878 24 September 2015 14: 03 New
        +1
        Quote: tomket
        30 mm it is against the infantry.

        30 mm not every duval will take, for example. Again - the high-explosive action of a 30 mm or 57 mm projectile.
        1. Login_Off
          Login_Off 24 September 2015 15: 20 New
          +3
          I so-so presented the picture ...
          5 ISIS men settled in somewhere in the alley and see the Terminator falling out and let them grind 30 mm guns from an automatic machine ... Everywhere the dust, the floor floor is gouged, maybe someone from ISIS will live away, but both without legs ...
          BUT HERE voice-over ... no, it's all garbage, it was necessary all the same 57 mm and high-explosive !!!
          Yes, you saw from what there houses in Syria and Iraq. There ammunition "Terminator" is enough to turn a couple of houses into rubble! What for there 57 mm. It is necessary that they fought from the line.
          1. Izotovp
            Izotovp 24 September 2015 16: 56 New
            +1
            The fact of the matter is that in modern quarters it can and will pass, but it will already be difficult with huts. Remember Afghanistan and how strong mud houses are. And besides this, ISIS also has captured armor.
          2. Dimka off
            Dimka off 25 September 2015 09: 47 New
            +1
            Quote: Login_Off
            Yes, you saw from what there houses in Syria and Iraq. There ammunition "Terminator" is enough to turn a couple of houses into rubble! What for there 57 mm. It is necessary that they fought from the line.

            Do not tell. They use both ZSU-57-2 and the reviews are very good. Hell thresher.
  7. Alexander 3
    Alexander 3 24 September 2015 12: 14 New
    +2
    It seems to me that they are already there.
  8. roskot
    roskot 24 September 2015 12: 16 New
    +3
    Crush bugs than possible. That would not creep on the ground.
  9. veksha50
    veksha50 24 September 2015 12: 17 New
    +1
    "If we talk about the protection of BMPT, then according to these characteristics, the machine significantly exceeds the Russian main battle tank T-90" "...

    A good characteristic ... Yes, and firepower at the level ...

    All the same, you need to experience in combat conditions ... Only here so as not to fall into the wrong hands ...
  10. rotmistr60
    rotmistr60 24 September 2015 12: 20 New
    +2
    It seems to me that not only the Terminators will be sent. Currently, none of the "doubters" will say that the GDP has "leaked" Syria. And how many groans were about this.
    1. Ruswolf
      Ruswolf 24 September 2015 12: 48 New
      +2
      rotmistr60
      And how many groans were about this.

      Just after Libya, people are already in doubt. Because everyone is silent about it. Silence.
      That's a little buzz. They are afraid to believe the good. But I think get used to it. The main thing is that politicians do not wag their tail.
      hi
      1. Seryoga DV
        Seryoga DV 24 September 2015 15: 01 New
        +2
        Quote: Ruswolf
        rotmistr60
        And how many groans were about this.

        Just after Libya, people are already in doubt. Because everyone is silent about it. Silence.
        That's a little buzz. They are afraid to believe the good. But I think get used to it. The main thing is that politicians do not wag their tail.
        hi

        In my opinion, there was a completely different situation with Libya. Assad does not run to twirl his tail in front of the West, does not sponsor the election of those who will bomb him, does not spin like a pig’s tail about arms contracts. Moreover, after seeing what happened to Libya with its “friendship” with Western “partners” and “friends”. He clearly adheres to allied obligations, despite the dire situation of his country.
  11. Averias
    Averias 24 September 2015 12: 22 New
    +24
    At RAE 2015 I had the pleasure of watching the work of this machine. Targets "sorted" competently. There were two of them, with 2 AGS and without them, and the platforms seem to be slightly different (I may be wrong, the truth). As I understand it, "Terminator" and "Terminator-2."
    My dog ​​looked very cool on him, which caused a lot of jokes among the public and the crew.
    1. Corsair0304
      Corsair0304 24 September 2015 12: 34 New
      +7
      This tanker)) and color in camouflage color))
      1. Averias
        Averias 24 September 2015 12: 40 New
        +4
        Quote: Corsair0304
        This tanker)) and color in camouflage color))

        While he (the dog) posed at the Terminator, the people gathered well, the cameras chattered like automatic machines. Friends say that my dog ​​flashed on TV in the news from the exhibition. Celebrity however laughing
        1. insafufa
          insafufa 25 September 2015 08: 16 New
          0
          I like the BMPT-2 more, as it is more suitable for fighting in the city, to burn in it three together or to losses is a big difference
      2. Nikolay K
        Nikolay K 24 September 2015 22: 48 New
        +1
        Camouflage suits the color of the Syrian desert
      3. The comment was deleted.
    2. The comment was deleted.
    3. Averias
      Averias 24 September 2015 12: 37 New
      +4
      And here is another version of Terminator
      1. Corsair0304
        Corsair0304 24 September 2015 12: 39 New
        +10
        The jacket on the Terminator looks so nothing)) complements the stern expression))
  12. Paul_
    Paul_ 24 September 2015 12: 23 New
    0
    And here Serdyukov nasnasral our army (((
  13. Wolka
    Wolka 24 September 2015 12: 24 New
    +1
    Yes, a good meat grinder for IG ...
    1. Vadim237
      Vadim237 24 September 2015 14: 05 New
      0
      The ammunition stockpiles at Terminator are small for warfare in Syria.
  14. The comment was deleted.
  15. pvv113
    pvv113 24 September 2015 12: 25 New
    0
    However, with the arrival of Serdyukov’s team in the Ministry of Defense, plans for not acquiring cars have sunk into oblivion.

    Again this surname pops up. He brought so much harm, hang it a little
  16. vyinemeynen
    vyinemeynen 24 September 2015 12: 26 New
    0
    Article ADVERTISED LIES !!!!!!!! Our military refused this device because of a misunderstanding of how to use it in battle. A device is weaker than a tank, which means tankers do not need it. Infantry cannot be transported, which means motorized infantry is not needed.
    I don’t know about the device in Kazakhstan, but there is NO serial production.
    The device may not even be very bad, but what does Syria have to do with it! For the sake of the humanitarian supply of the Terminator to Syria, to organize its mass production - BRED. It’s easier to remove and send a couple of tanks from the Soviet stocks of Soviet stocks to the Syrians!
    1. Averias
      Averias 24 September 2015 12: 47 New
      +6
      I do not presume to argue, I am not engaged in the procurement of equipment for the needs of the army. But at the exhibition, communicating with the same military, I heard a completely different opinion. Conversations about refinement to specific needs and conditions, yes, they were. But about the misunderstanding why he, sorry, did not hear this from them. Yes, and during the operation of equipment at the training ground. everything was perfectly visible and understandable - for what he and what he can. This is my opinion (subjective), multiplied by communication with the military (and of good rank, technically and tactically competent).
      1. vyinemeynen
        vyinemeynen 24 September 2015 12: 57 New
        -1
        What I wrote is the answer to my question (why "T" is not in the army) from competent people.
    2. Petrof
      Petrof 24 September 2015 12: 48 New
      0
      and what prevents check it in Syria in a real battle?
      You can’t come up with a better case, but you don’t need to organize production - they already exist
      1. Sukhoi
        Sukhoi 24 September 2015 13: 34 New
        +2
        With the advent of the T-15, the need for the Terminator disappeared. Only as an option to upgrade old tanks.
    3. Per se.
      Per se. 24 September 2015 13: 43 New
      +4
      Quote: vyinemeynen
      Article ADVERTISED LIES !!!!!!!! Our military refused this device because of a misunderstanding of how to use it in battle.
      And what is the article "lies"? There is no understanding in the use of the "device", so you can’t read the old charters and methods forever, you need to develop something new, life does not stand still. There was a time, the BMP was first created in the world, and was created in the USSR. For her, by and large, not everything was the same as that of the APCs previously used in the war. BMPTs began to be developed back in the USSR, taking into account the combat experience of various conflicts, including our war in Afghanistan. If the BMP can be considered a universal machine, combining both the possibility of transporting infantry and fire support, the BMPT focuses on fire support with specialized weapons that the tank does not have. In order for the concept of the use of BMPT to appear, one must understand that this is not a contrast between BMP and its complement. Any heaviest infantry fighting vehicle (including the new T-15) in terms of fire will be weaker than the infantry fighting vehicle, when, after dismounting, the infantry will begin to fulfill its support functions. Ideally, BMPT should be supplemented by a heavy armored personnel carrier, where a BMP, without risking unhurried infantry, performs fire functions, and a heavy armored personnel carrier, without climbing into the front line and having enhanced protection, performs only transport functions on the battlefield. Heavy BTR and BMPT, it is divided by the functions of the BMP. The BMP itself is ideal precisely as a universal machine (BMP-3), especially for such mobile forces as the marines (BMP-3F, reach it to our marines) and as a BMD (BMD-4M) for the airborne forces. A heavy infantry fighting vehicle, if needed at all, perhaps only as a counter-guerrilla fighting vehicle in police, anti-terrorist operations, but hardly in a big war with a first-class army. And maybe it’s easier “to remove and send a couple of tanks from the Soviet stocks of Soviet stocks to the Syrians!”, But not smarter and not better. With "HH Soviet stocks", it is better to remake in BMPT, it will be much more effective. We really need to test the BMPT in Syria, is it really difficult to make (or remake from tanks) a dozen cars, and to find out the opinions of the military.
      1. strannik1985
        strannik1985 24 September 2015 13: 57 New
        +2
        Any heaviest infantry fighting vehicle (including the new T-15) in terms of fire component will be weaker than the infantry fighting vehicle, when, after dismounting, the infantry will begin to fulfill its support functions.

        Why? For example, on the long-developed BMP-3 100 mm 2A70, according to the bunker / bunker, manpower, field fortifications, it will work much better than 30 mm 2A72 BMPT, even if there are two barrels instead of one.
        1. Per se.
          Per se. 24 September 2015 18: 46 New
          +2
          Quote: strannik1985
          Why? For example, on a long-mastered BMP-3 100 mm 2A70
          Therefore, dear Vladimir, that the "three-wheeler" does not have tank armor, and on BMPT the defense exceeds even tank, this time. The second, the fact that now there are a couple of 30 mm guns on the BMPT, does not mean that different versions of the BMPT cannot have other combat modules, including Bahchu. Finally, you can’t add anything without decreasing anything, these are not pumping tanks in network games. Infantry transportation on the battlefield is an important transport function, infantry fire support is also a serious function. If an "idea-fix" has arisen, to create a "bomb shelter" on the tracks (or wheels), with a biological sack, air conditioning, wide rear doors and other amenities, so that it is desirable that infantry does not crawl out from under the armor for war, this is utopia. And so we get the newly-moused “Mouse”, which will be picked up anyway, undermined by a more powerful mine, from which the infantry will still have to dismount, climb out of the war. I heard the opinion of the driver with the BMP-2, who believed that maneuverability and maneuverability was much more important than the "thick-skinned" slowness (the man was in real battles). What did we get in the coveted T-15 Armata? The first thing that catches your eye is the size, “Bradley”, “Warrior” and “Marder” are resting here. The machine does not float, due to the large weight there will be increased fuel consumption (range will decrease) and lower engine life. The base was declared a “platform” without waiting for the test results and its recognition as successful and reliable, which is important for creating families of military vehicles on this base. If the T-95 could be considered an amplification tank, a super-tank (Russian Tiger and Abrams Kaput), then its high price justified it, one hit of an 152 mm projectile from a long range guaranteed to destroy all known tanks. To make the T-95 a "platform", no one was going to like the T-14. Well, make a “boot” or pickup truck on the basis of the Lexus, what is the “platform” reasonable? Now this idea is being promoted as ingenious, as if, before, various combat vehicles were not created on the basis of the T-72, from spreaders to self-propelled guns, TOS and the same BMPT. The stocks of old tanks could be used for such alterations, and not on an expensive base to make repair and evacuation vehicles and so on, better focusing on the production of the T-14 tanks themselves. I already said, I repeat, there is an excellent universal BMP-3 (and BMD-4M), for a large, maneuverable war, a BMPT was created on the basis of the tank, for work in the first line, which would not be prevented by a "partner", a heavy armored personnel carrier. Having lost the versatility of infantry fighting vehicles, they would receive highly efficient specialized combat vehicles in addition to tanks, and on their basis, where the infantry fighting vehicles would carry out combat functions, and heavy armored personnel carriers would be transported. If BMPT can be converted from old tanks, then a heavy armored personnel carrier can be created similarly (Israeli “Ahzarit” was based on the captured T-54 / T-55). Well, and the last, the T-15 is armed no more than the BMP-2 in the Berezhok variant.
          1. strannik1985
            strannik1985 24 September 2015 20: 23 New
            0
            Therefore, dear Vladimir, that the "three-wheeler" does not have tank armor, and on BMPT the defense exceeds even tank, this time.

            I am happy for the crew, but the armament is protected at the level of a conventional BMP.
            The second, the fact that now there is a pair of 30 mm guns on the BMPT, does not mean that the various BMPT variants cannot have other combat modules, including Bahchu

            Those. firepower willat the BMP-3/4 level.
            Infantry transportation on the battlefield is an important transport function, infantry fire support is also a serious function

            BMPT infantry does not replace, i.e. when attacking a prepared defense, we come to the classic ligament-tank + infantry + other means, one of which will be BMPT. And what is the point of fencing a separate car duplicating the usual BMP in the tasks solved by the usual outfit of forces? Is the budget bottomless? Are the railway capacity endless or the capabilities of subunits and supply units?
            1. Per se.
              Per se. 25 September 2015 08: 32 New
              0
              Quote: strannik1985
              BMPT infantry does not replace
              Nothing can replace the infantry, not even robots, but the BMPT can significantly facilitate the solution of combat tasks by infantry and tanks. "City" just start with a heavy BMP, and not with BMPT. The budget is not bottomless, true, but the BMPT can be redone from stocks of old tanks, and this is the reason, as well as the fact that even a new BMPT on the T-90 chassis will be cheaper than the T-15.
              1. strannik1985
                strannik1985 25 September 2015 08: 41 New
                +1
                Nothing can replace the infantry, not even robots, but the BMPT can significantly facilitate the solution of combat tasks by infantry and tanks.

                The fact that the infantry, in addition to its armored infantry fighting vehicles and attached tanks, will also need to cover the BMPT?
                1. Per se.
                  Per se. 25 September 2015 09: 07 New
                  0
                  Quote: strannik1985
                  and BMPT cover?
                  If everything is "brilliantly" organized, then the infantry will have to cover with infantry. There are various combat missions, types of combat, somewhere BMPT will be very needed, somewhere not really, somewhere the tank will not be needed. Why is it so hard to imagine at least a couple of BMPTs at a tank battalion? What is the strain, what are the special costs when the BMPT goes on a tank base, will it be worse to solve combat tasks?
                  1. strannik1985
                    strannik1985 25 September 2015 11: 05 New
                    +1
                    Why is it so hard to imagine at least a couple of BMPTs at a tank battalion? What is the strain, what are the special costs when the BMPT goes on a tank base, will it be worse to solve combat tasks?

                    What for? What tasks cannot tanks with support means solve, what for this must be entered into the BMPT TB?
                    1. Per se.
                      Per se. 25 September 2015 13: 48 New
                      0
                      Quote: strannik1985
                      What for? What tasks cannot tanks with support means solve, what for this must be entered into the BMPT TB?
                      By the beginning of the 80's, the experience of combat training of troops, the results of studies showed that a breakthrough of prepared enemy defenses according to the traditional scheme using tanks and infantry fighting vehicles becomes problematic, due to the massive saturation of the defending side with manual anti-tank weapons. In addition, it is worth recalling the experience of using tanks in Afghanistan and Grozny. When modern MBTs became virtually defenseless against individual grenade launchers hiding in the folds of the terrain and houses. Namely, under the influence of this experience, the concept of BMPT was developed. The fact is that to combat such threats, the armament of the tank is excessive and ineffective due to insufficient rate of fire. Weapons, to fight the enemy’s tank-dangerous manpower, need not be powerful, but must be quick-fire and be able to quickly reorient from one target to another. In addition, the combat vehicle itself, should have been unlike, for example, BMP, in general, in terms of armament that meets the above requirements, armored at the level of MBT. Since avoiding fire contact with the enemy, it still does not work out, and booking an infantry fighting vehicle and armored personnel carrier is categorically insufficient to withstand, not only falling from grenade launchers, but even from large-caliber small arms.
                      So the idea of ​​BMPT was born. In fact, a tank with small-caliber weapons.
                      During the BMPT demonstration at the exhibition in Nizhny Tagil, representatives of the Israeli delegation immediately became interested in it. And they even spoke out in terms of the immediate procurement of a BMPT batch to support Israeli Merkava tanks, which were poorly adapted for operations in urban conditions, and were involved in mopping up Palestinian settlements. True, at the last moment the Israelis changed their minds - they decided that they themselves would be able to develop their own analogue of BMPT. In addition to the Israelis, the Malaysian military also showed interest in purchasing BMPTs. So, it is possible that not the Russian military will be the first to adopt BMPTs.
                      In conclusion, I want to say that, in my opinion, not the adoption of BMPT for the armament of the Russian army lies far from the TTX plane of this system. The sources of why BMPT is not accepted into service should be sought in corruption pervading everything and everyone. Apparently, take BMPT into service, those responsible for this business will not receive a sufficient rollback for them. So they are clamoring for this project, quite clearly hinting to the representatives of the Uralvagonzavod that they need to do so that their brainchild receives funding from the Russian defense department.
                      By the way, the situation with BMPT reminds me very much of the situation with armored personnel carriers on the eve of the war. Then, also, the military did not find application for a new technique. For which, then, our soldiers paid millions of their lives.

                      From myself I’ll just say that the one who wants is looking for opportunities, and the one who is unwilling to find reasons. It’s not scary to declare the transition to new “platforms”, with all the dampness of the projects and the ambiguity of the concept of the transition, and “introducing BMPT into TB” is stupid ...
                      1. strannik1985
                        strannik1985 25 September 2015 17: 35 New
                        +1
                        Thank you, I read an article on Courage.
                        With all due respect to the tank department of the VA BTV, this is only one of the concepts (all the more not tested in practice), the other was the increase in armor and firepower of armored infantry fighting vehicles of linear units (BMP-3, Bradley).
                        I never saw in what situation a tank with full-time support means cannot perform without a BMPT.
          2. Dimka off
            Dimka off 25 September 2015 09: 55 New
            +1
            Quote: Per se.
            If the T-95 could be considered an amplification tank, a super tank (Russian Tiger and Abrams Kaput), then its high price justified it, one hit of a 152 mm projectile from a long range guaranteed to destroy all known tanks. But to make the T-95 a "platform", no one was going to like the T-14. Well, make a “boot” or pickup truck on the basis of the Lexus, what is the “platform” reasonable?

            If on the platform of Almaty there will be a self-propelled gun Coalition, then it will surely withstand a tank turret with a 152 mm gun. Why, they say that such a gun will be put on the T-14 in the future
            1. Per se.
              Per se. 25 September 2015 11: 25 New
              0
              Quote: Dimka off
              If the platform of Almaty will be self-propelled guns Coalition
              The self-propelled guns "Coalition", as everyone saw at the May parade, is well placed on the cheaper and more reliable T-90 base. I expressed my complicated attitude to the use of the expensive T-14 base for vehicles other than tanks, earlier. Earlier, about the lost time and costs when creating the Armata platform (only for research and development, according to Vladimir Putin, about 64 billions of rubles), instead of fine-tuning the T-95 state test that had already passed, with some comments, back in 2010 year. But, thanks for the fact that at least T-95 was "formatted" in T-14, and the idea itself was preserved. I also really hope that the T-14 will be equipped with an 152 mm gun (on the T-95, in addition to the 152 mm gun, the 2A83 was also equipped with the 30 mm automatic gun 2A42, with a limited individual guidance sector for secondary purposes, saving 152 mm shots) T-14 has not yet been observed.
              1. Dimka off
                Dimka off 25 September 2015 16: 29 New
                +1
                Quote: Per se.
                I also really hope that a 14 mm gun will be put on the T-152 (on the T-95, in addition to the 152 mm 2A83 gun, there was a 30 mm 2A42 automatic gun, with a limited individual guidance sector for secondary purposes, saving 152 mm shots), which T-14 has not yet been observed.

                Will still be yes
      2. vyinemeynen
        vyinemeynen 24 September 2015 19: 34 New
        0
        Write a letter to the MO with the requirement to change the charters and methods in order to adopt and urgently put in the troops of the TERMINATOR, because You like him. The people are spoiling from the heart! laughing And the developments from the terminator are clearly used in the T-15, etc.
        1. Per se.
          Per se. 25 September 2015 09: 17 New
          0
          Quote: vyinemeynen
          Write a letter to the MO with the requirement to change the charters and methods in order to adopt and urgently put in the TERMINATOR troops, as Do you like him
          Thanks for the advice, but with age, you become a cynic and a pessimist somewhere in order to write letters in the Ministry of Defense. If there are creative, caring people in our Moscow Region, they read both the articles on the Military Review website and our comments. If not, calling their minds is useless - "The people are spoiling from the heart!"." Operating time "from" Terminator "which side are used on the T-15, if they have a different technical concept? However, you have your own opinion, this is your right.
    4. pilot8878
      pilot8878 24 September 2015 14: 06 New
      +1
      Quote: vyinemeynen
      Our military refused this device because of a misunderstanding of how to use it in battle.

      Here is the key phrase. In the process of applying in battle, understanding will come whether he is needed or not, and if necessary, in what form.
      1. strannik1985
        strannik1985 24 September 2015 14: 22 New
        0
        Here is the key phrase. In the process of applying in battle, understanding will come whether he is needed or not, and if necessary, in what form.

        Already passed, even at the time of the Soyuz- “goldfish” with a titanium hull and a LMT reactor, ekranoplanes, VTOL, hydrofoil RTGs, hydrofoils, water carriers Pr.941, TAVKR instead of AB ...
    5. Blackgrifon
      Blackgrifon 24 September 2015 14: 33 New
      +2
      Quote: vyinemeynen
      Our military refused this device because of a misunderstanding of how to use it in battle.

      Yeah, and before that, they conducted scientific work for 30 years, riveted 4 prototypes, and then the BAC forgot at one moment why it was necessary ?!
      By your logic, they used Shilka from idleness in Afghanistan, but they do not need BRMs or self-propelled guns either — not a tank or BMP.
      The task of the BMPT is well known to the military for a long time - in detail, material on courage 2004 was highlighted. The question is that the emergence of new BBMs can offset the need for a personalized car.
      1. Blackgrifon
        Blackgrifon 24 September 2015 14: 44 New
        +2
        Object 787 "Viper" - just one of the predecessors of the Terminator. The project was crushed for reasons not related to understanding / misunderstanding the purpose.
  17. Leeder
    Leeder 24 September 2015 12: 30 New
    +2
    Quote: tomket
    30 mm. it is against the infantry. nevertheless, it was planned that they would operate in the same order as tanks. and in which case the tank can close up 125mm shell.

    Yes, since there aren’t any kind of heavily fortified bunkers, and even a tank caliber will not help for heaps of garbage left over from cities. Here only TOS will help ...
    So 30 mm. that will be! Scalpel for urban fighting, maneuverable, rapid-firing and protected. yes
    No wonder the Syrians are actively using Shilka in the city.
    1. Blackgrifon
      Blackgrifon 24 September 2015 14: 45 New
      0
      I just don’t understand, but why the 30 mm spark could not be installed in place of the old gun?
  18. VP
    VP 24 September 2015 12: 36 New
    -2
    A promotional article by a producer whose bend is tied to Syria.
  19. Corsair0304
    Corsair0304 24 September 2015 12: 37 New
    +2
    Quote: vyinemeynen
    Our military refused this device because of a misunderstanding of how to use it in battle.

    Argument.
    I have nothing against your opinion, I just would like to get acquainted with something more justified.

    PS So that the tanker in his right mind abandons the device that additionally protects his skin ?? Vague doubts torment me ... sad
    1. strannik1985
      strannik1985 24 September 2015 12: 47 New
      0
      Argument.

      The point is that ordinary motorized riflemen (normally trained, and not like in Grozny 1995) on an infantry fighting vehicle block the capabilities of this vehicle (except for the protection level of the infantry fighting vehicle itself), it cannot replace a tank or infantry fighting vehicle. The point of introducing a third car into the unit?
      1. Petrof
        Petrof 24 September 2015 12: 50 New
        0
        Quote: strannik1985
        The point of introducing a third car into the unit?


        Kazakhs decided that there is a sense
        and you can only check in battle
        1. strannik1985
          strannik1985 24 September 2015 13: 08 New
          0
          Kazakhs decided that there is a sense
          and you can only check in battle

          The Kazakhs bought as many as 10 cars.
          And what about pre-war planning? In particular, in terms of finance, the budget is not rubber, BMPT purchases minus Berezhok complexes for the modernization of BMP-1/2, for example.
          1. Petrof
            Petrof 24 September 2015 13: 11 New
            0
            here are a few pieces and experience both of them (crib)
            before mass purchase
      2. vyinemeynen
        vyinemeynen 24 September 2015 19: 49 New
        0
        Thanks, I tried to convey this. hi
        and, of course, spare parts and repair logistics (now this is exactly why they are trying to unify armored vehicles)
    2. Engineer
      Engineer 24 September 2015 12: 50 New
      -1
      A tanker would rather entrust his skin to another tank than a castrato from this tank
    3. VP
      VP 24 September 2015 13: 19 New
      +1
      Where did you see the tank?
      This is not a tank. This is an infantry fighting vehicle that cannot transport infantry.
      1. Blackgrifon
        Blackgrifon 24 September 2015 14: 46 New
        0
        This is not a tank or BMP - this is a pure fire support vehicle. More secure than the standard BRM and one of the options for converting old equipment.
  20. aleksey.svalov
    aleksey.svalov 24 September 2015 12: 46 New
    +1
    Quote: maks-xnumx
    Serdyuk on the count must be planted.

    And not him alone. The list would be made up by the whole world.
  21. bish
    bish 24 September 2015 12: 47 New
    +1
    BMPT in terms of its characteristics should also support infantry while storming the fortified positions of terrorists. BMPT is well protected from portable anti-tank weapons, which will not allow it to be destroyed from a hidden position. With its fire, it will be able to effectively suppress firing points and ensure the advance of infantry. BMPTs seemed to have thermobaric warheads of missiles, which means they can destroy fortified points in houses. She would still have an effective radar to detect where rockets were flying in her direction, mines and destroy the firing gun with return fire.
  22. ARES623
    ARES623 24 September 2015 12: 50 New
    +1
    It seems that Syria can be used as a training ground for new weapons. This is done by all arms manufacturers and always. In local conflicts of variable intensity, you can check the capabilities of the machine, its need, place in the state, etc.
  23. Engineer
    Engineer 24 September 2015 12: 57 New
    +2
    I see no prospects for BMPT in our army with the advent of the T-15 in general. Instead of castrating the T-90 to the BMPT level, it would be better if they upgraded on the basis of the old Soviet T-54 and T-62 tanks, which are still quite numerous in foreign armies. Such an option would be interesting to potential reserves.
    1. ayuric
      ayuric 24 September 2015 14: 45 New
      0
      I think UVZ works in both directions hi
    2. Dimka off
      Dimka off 25 September 2015 10: 05 New
      0
      Quote: Engineer
      I see no prospects for BMPT in our army with the advent of the T-15 in general.

      Why so? Put the module with a 57 mm gun. There will be the same T-15 only at the landing site of BC, selective nutrition. Judging by the amphibious assault squad, the ammunition will grow up to 1000 shots IMHO. Plus, among other things, hang a radar on such a machine for guidance over the radio channel - and you get a beast.
  24. slizhov
    slizhov 24 September 2015 14: 04 New
    0
    Well, since "would come in handy ...", then - LITTER!
  25. Crown
    Crown 24 September 2015 14: 25 New
    0
    If the Terminator will solve its problems, why not?
  26. iouris
    iouris 24 September 2015 15: 59 New
    0
    A tank for the city and this platform is what you need.
  27. slaw14
    slaw14 24 September 2015 16: 37 New
    +1
    On mountain streamers and in urban conditions, tanks are too vulnerable and therefore create light fire support for BMPT (and not only here).
    The tower from Terminator can be installed on any of our tanks up to t-55
    The BMPT weapons (according to Dmitry Rogozin) are planned to be based on the Armat platform (most likely BMP-15). Perhaps this is why the Terminators have not yet received the stream.
    1. Sukhoi
      Sukhoi 24 September 2015 17: 21 New
      +1
      The armament of the Terminator (the second, because the first has lost its relevance) is almost identical to the Epoch module with a few exceptions in the form of 2x2A42. Therefore BMPT as such is only an original way of modernizing old tanks + export on the T-90 platform.
    2. strannik1985
      strannik1985 24 September 2015 17: 40 New
      +1
      And for this, since 1981, BMP-2s with air-to-air forces up to +74 degrees entered the troops.
      BMPT why make a fuss? Moreover, in terms of armament it is inferior to the BMP-3.
      1. Sukhoi
        Sukhoi 24 September 2015 18: 01 New
        +1
        BMPT why make a fuss? Moreover, in terms of armament it is inferior to the BMP-3.

        city ​​to sell. And the main thing here is not weapons, but security. BMPs, although they are called to act in the same ranks with tanks, are currently too poorly protected.
        1. strannik1985
          strannik1985 24 September 2015 19: 59 New
          0
          . And the main thing here is not weapons, but security. BMPs, although they are called to act in the same ranks with tanks, are currently too poorly protected.

          The crew is protected, weapons are protected at or worse than the linear BMP.
          IFVs without dismounting an airborne assault operate when attacking an unprepared defense, in all other cases, the airborne assault is dismounted and the tanks attack with the support of the infantry.
  28. Berthan
    Berthan 24 September 2015 16: 38 New
    0
    ... during the fulfillment of the Syrian mission very useful would BMPT "Terminator" ...


    Exactly this "would", it could be clarified already - once ... twenty.
  29. serezhasoldatow
    serezhasoldatow 24 September 2015 17: 49 New
    0
    “The presence in Syria of Russian MILITARY and Russian military equipment became an obvious fact.” Was this an official statement by the Russian Federation?
  30. vell.65
    vell.65 24 September 2015 18: 54 New
    0
    Quote: ziqzaq
    Both...

    That's just the civilian population there is enough in the city blocks, so a very thorough reconnaissance is needed, and a “little hook” would be very useful.
  31. Maxwrx
    Maxwrx 24 September 2015 23: 23 New
    0
    they don’t know where to shove this bmpt. in addition to a controversial place in the army (I can’t dare to judge, maybe he will still show his best side), in Syria he will not be able to use his advantage. the whole trick of 2 guns is that in one they are loaded with armor-piercing, and in the other they are high-explosive / fragmentation and when targets appear, he does not waste time changing the tape, but starts firing. rebels have very few armored vehicles. the main shell will be high-explosive. Ptur also could be used little when, and getting into a rocket is fraught with a loss of equipment. so if you already supply highly protected equipment, a simplified version without these bells and whistles that are not needed there. As you know, we don’t have such serial equipment. even BMPT is not a serial equipment, its cost will be like a tank or even higher. training, development of a usage strategy, repair, etc. also does not add pls. Is it worth it when it’s not taking advantage?
  32. Old26
    Old26 24 September 2015 23: 50 New
    -1
    Quote: vovanpain
    Solntsepek "there seems to already be there, now in combat conditions we run around the Terminator

    Do not break in. He is not there. Those few pieces that are carried around exhibitions - and that’s it. And will not be.

    Quote: jarome
    In general, the Moscow Oblast could give an order for 5-10 units (stuffed with cameras to record work efficiency), and if it turned out to be really as awesome as it is presented in battle conditions, it would be difficult to find the best advertising, which would mean orders and contracts.

    You can certainly find a database, but in order to release at least 5 pieces, you will need at least a solution at a fairly high level. And the terminator is an initiative development, although the Kazakhs ordered a dozen ...

    Quote: Lt. Air Force stock
    And Syria would not hurt to accept the CSTO.

    And who else do you want to accept in the CSTO? Well, when our barnes will fight and die in the territory of the former USSR. I would not want to, but at least it’s clear. And for the sake of others, why? Or will the Syrian units be urgently transferred to us in Central Asia, if necessary ??
    And how will you support Syria, if you need it urgently, to stop the militant attack within 2-3 hours? Holy spirit?

    Quote: inkass_98
    Such a machine can come in handy where a lot, we won’t hint where exactly. Yes, and it would not hurt to buy for ourselves.

    And for yourself, why? Or there are not enough forces and means to fulfill the tasks assigned to the units. There is simply no tactical niche for Terminator. And if the commander acts according to the BUSV, then the available equipment is enough.
  33. Old26
    Old26 25 September 2015 08: 37 New
    0
    Quote: MaxWRX
    the whole trick of 2 guns is that in one they are loaded with armor-piercing, and in the other they are high-explosive / fragmentation and when targets appear, he does not waste time changing the tape, but starts firing.

    Have selective guns been banned yet?

    Quote: MaxWRX
    rebels have very few armored vehicles. the main projectile will be high-explosive

    The high-explosive fragmentation effect of a 30-mm shell is not enough, not to say below the plinth. Especially in the urban area, where there will be many mud houses.

    Quote: MaxWRX
    Is it worth it when it’s not taking advantage?

    You're right. Not worth it