Projects of infantry fighting vehicles in NATO countries


US Marines land from their BMN M2A3 Bradley


Armed with guns BMP, created for motorized combat, are an integral part of the modern ground forces. Consider the latest developments in this area, conducted in the armies of NATO.

PSM Projekt System & Management officially handed over the first production machine, Puma, to the German army during a solemn ceremony held on 24 on June 2015 of the year at the Unterlus test site. For the army, this event was significant, since the third generation BMP was adopted.

In the German army, the BMP Puma will replace the Marder 1 tracked vehicle manufactured by Rheinmetall Landsysteme, which entered service in the 1971 year. With the adoption of the Schutzenpanzer SPz 12-3 tracked in 1958, Germany became the first NATO country to develop and deliver a typical BMP to the troops. The German army was not entirely convinced of the correctness of the American concept of an armored personnel carrier as a “combat taxi”, which would land its infantry squad and hide in a shelter until the need to move the squad again arose.

Armed with an 20-mm cannon, the SPz 12-3 infantry fighting vehicle was perceived as a machine that could be used by an infantry unit rather as a standard weapon system than just a vehicle. The German army made a compromise here, as it needed heavier weapons and additional reservations to participate in direct combat clashes. As a result, the SPz 12-3 infantry combat vehicle could accept a detachment of just five foot soldiers. This machine was also tormented by problems with mechanics and, in the end, the German Ministry of Defense issued a contract for the development of its successor in 1960.

Requirements for the future machine designation Marder 1 included: 20-mm cannon, the ability to carry 12 people (crew - commander, gunner and driver, and 9 infantry infantry unit), the ability for troops to fire from inside the machine. And again the German army was forced to compromise and accept that only six infantry could be accommodated in the aft troop compartment.


BMP Marder 1

Initially, the car had four loopholes, two on each side of the troop compartment; this allowed the landing party in the car to fire from personal weapons. But, starting from 1989, on the upgraded versions of Marder 1A3, these embrasures began to be closed with additional armor screens.

The Marder 1 BMP was never used in high-intensity combat operations, for which it was actually created, although it was deployed by the German contingent in the former Yugoslavia in the 90s and in Afghanistan in the 2000s, where improvised explosive devices became the main threat to this machine. (IED).


Marder 1A5

The Army upgraded the Marder 74A1 machines to the A3 standard in 5 – 2003 years by installing additional armor to protect against mines and IEDs and rearranging the armored space to reduce injuries and contusions from the explosion and shock wave. Some machines in the 2004-2010 years were upgraded to the A2011A5 standard by installing an IED silencer, air conditioning system and multispectral camouflage. Germany sold out of the presence of its army 1 BMP Marder 280 in Chile and 1 machines to Indonesia; no doubt there will be other buyers for these cars.


The German army officially received the first 350 BMP Puma 24 June 2015

Big cats

PSM (a joint venture company Krauss-Maffei Wegmann and Rheinmetall) was awarded the contract to develop the Puma tracked vehicle in 2004. The initial need was determined in 405 machines, but in June 2012, Berlin reduced their number to 350 units, which was a consequence of the reduction in the number of the army; The last batch will be delivered in 2020 year. The cost of the contract today is 4,3 billion euros.

According to representatives of the company PSM, the main thing for the army was to develop a BMP "with levels of protection that machines of this class do not have." Other key requirements included strategic and tactical mobility, firepower, situational awareness, network-centric military operations and management within the international coalition, combat readiness in extreme weather conditions with a minimum logistics base, and, finally, interfaces with the friend-foe recognition system , the German information and control network FuInfoSyS C4I, with combat equipment IdZ and active protection complexes.

The BMP Puma, like the BMP Marder, houses a crew of three plus six paratroopers. Installing a remote-controlled tower allows all crew members to be placed in the vehicle body. The turret is armed with an 30-mm selective-feed cannon Mauser MK 30-2 / ABM (Air Burst Munition) and an 5,56-mm MG4 H & K machine gun (Heckler & Koch) paired with it. The gun can fire armor-piercing sabots and ammunition air blast with a remote fuse.

The German army plans to replace MG4 with a new 7,62-mm HK121 H & K machine gun, which allows the shooter to choose the rate of fire of 600, 700 or 800 per minute. On the left side of the tower there are two EuroSpike-LR ATGM launchers.

The Puma BMP weighs 31,45 tons in the basic configuration of the Protection Class A, which allows the aircraft to be transferred using an Airbus A400M transport aircraft, which is currently being used by the German army. The Protection Class C kit adds 9 tons to the vehicle’s bulk and consists of additional turret armor, armor plates on the roof, and side panels that cover most of the sides and work like tracked screens. The complementary protection kit is a combination of composite armor and dynamic protection units.

In accordance with the German military doctrine, Panzergrenadier motorized infantry battalions, which will receive the Puma infantry fighting vehicle, together with the battalions tanks Leopard 2 are equipped with armored divisions and undergo joint training at the tank training center in Munster. Three infantry companies of the battalion will receive 14 Puma vehicles, two more vehicles will be given to the headquarters of the battalion, therefore, each battalion will be armed with 44 infantry fighting vehicles. The companies will receive their cars at the training center, undergo three-month training there, and then return to their locations with the new Puma machines. The first of eight such battalions, Panzergrenadierbataillon 33, is due to be fully operational in 2016.

Projects of infantry fighting vehicles in NATO countries

The LAV III Canadian Army manufactured by GDLS Canada is one of several BMPs based on the Piranha chassis.

Popular in Europe

The most widespread tracked BMP in Europe is the CV90 manufactured by BAE Systems Haglunds, which will soon be in service with seven countries. Its development began in 1984 year with the aim of satisfying the Swedish army’s BMP, which combines mobility, protection and firepower with a modular design in order to use this machine for other tasks, such as air defense. Deliveries of the first 509 machines for Sweden began in the 1993 year. Almost 700 BMPs were sold, including to Denmark (45), Finland (102), the Netherlands (193), Norway (146) and Switzerland (186). Most recently, in December 2014, Estonia bought from the presence of the 44 Dutch army BMP CV9035NL. Danish, Dutch, Norwegian and Swedish vehicles were deployed in hostilities in Afghanistan.

The Swedish CV9040 BMPs are armed with a 40-mm Bofors cannon, but all foreign customers have chosen the 30- or 35-mm cannon. The latest standard CV9035 Mk III allowed to significantly increase the combat capabilities of the machine. An Orbital ATK Bushmaster III 35 gun, an independent commander's sight with search and percussion capabilities, third-generation thermal imagers for the gunner and commander were installed, high-level protection was integrated, including protection against mines and cluster munitions, a battle management system, protection complexes and a tire were installed high-speed data transmission, also increased payload capacity for future upgrades.

In June, 2012, Norway signed a contract with BAE Systems worth 750 million dollars to upgrade 103 machines CV90 and manufacture 41 new machines. Ultimately, the park will consist of: 74 BMP; 21 reconnaissance vehicle with an optoelectronic monitoring station on the mast; 15 control points; 16 engineering vehicles; 16 multipurpose machines that can be configured for various tasks, such as a mortar complex or logistics, and two training machines.


Dutch BMP CV90

Norwegian upgrades include higher-level armor protection, a digital electronic architecture, a refined situational awareness system, the installation of a Kongsberg remotely controlled combat module (SDM) with an 12,7-mm M2HB machine gun on the roof on all versions with 30-mm guns. This MFD can be used in the search-and-shock mode and as an aiming system for the 30-mm cannon, as well as firing from the troop compartment. Two pre-production vehicles were delivered in February 2014 for extended testing, and the first production vehicle was handed over to the troops in February 2015.

The Swedish organization of defense procurement is also engaged in an extensive modernization of the entire fleet of Swedish CV90 infantry fighting vehicles, which will consist in installing a new battle management system, which will extend the life of the vehicles to 2030 of the year.

Finnish fighter

The project of the modular armored vehicle AMV (Armored Modular Vehicle) 8x8 Finnish company Patria became popular, this machine is often chosen as a BMP. In April, 2013, the Polish Ministry of Defense signed a contract that provides for the joint production of 570 AMV machines 8x8 in Poland; there these machines received the designation Rosomak. This number includes 313 BMP, equipped with OTO Melara HITFIST-30P turret, armed with MK30 Bushmaster II 44 gun. Rosomak machines from 2007 have been deployed in Afghanistan. In October, 2013 Poland also ordered 307 machines with a total value of 544 million dollars with deliveries planned before 2019, and issued separate contracts for the modernization of 99 existing machines.

These contracts included the 122 BMP, equipped with an uninhabited turret developed by Polish companies HSW and WB Electronics and armed with a 30-mm cannon and two Rafael Spike ATGM launchers. According to the schedule, the development of this tower should be completed this year. The two battalions of the mechanized brigade, which according to the plans are scheduled to be given to the joint operational group of NATO high readiness, will be the first units to receive new infantry fighting vehicles.


BMP AMV-Rosomak

The terms of the Polish contract with Patria allow Rosomak to be offered for export to other countries. In July, 2015, Slovakia announced the purchase of an 31 Rosomak 8x8 chassis worth 31 million dollars, on which the uninhabited TURRA 30 towers developed by local EVPU and DMD Group will be installed. In this configuration, the machines will receive the designation Scipio. As expected, Slovakia will buy 66 vehicles for arming two battalions.

A demonstration sample under the designation Rosomak-Scipio 8x8 was shown at the IDET defense exhibition, which took place in May 2015 in the Czech Republic. The TURRA 30 turret can take on Russian armaments, including the 30-mm 2A42 cannon, the PKT 7,62-mm machine gun and two PTN 9K111 launchers Bassoon or 9K113 Competition. At IDET, the TURRA 30 turret was demonstrated with a Western armament complex consisting of the MK44 Mod 1 Bushmaster II cannon and the 12,7-mm M2HB machine gun.

The South African Army also chose AMV to meet its needs for infantry fighting vehicles. In September, Denel Land Systems received a contract worth approximately 2014 million dollars for the supply of Badger 900 machines in four versions, including BMPs equipped with a Denel LCT238 twin-turret with a GI-30 selective gun and a paired 30- mm machine gun. In addition to the crew of three, eight paratroopers are located on the energy-absorbing seats in the aft compartment of this BMP. The first Badger 30 enclosures are supplied by Patria, and the rest will be manufactured at a local factory.

Pumped BMP BRADLEY

The Bradley combat vehicle from BAE Systems has been at the forefront of almost all US Army operations since its entry into service in 1983. The MXN tracked infantry combat vehicle in the M2 version is armed with a motorized infantry battalion, and the M3 variant is used by reconnaissance units as part of the ABCT armored brigade groups. The M2 version is equipped with a twin turret armed with a 25-mm M242 Bushmaster cannon, an 7,62-mm M240C machine gun paired with it and two TOW anti-tank guided missiles. In addition to the commander, gunner and driver in the aft troop compartment housed seven people.

Bradley has received numerous enhancements over its lifetime. The latest version of A3 has digital electronic equipment that raises the level of information awareness and provides the ability to connect to the network and exchange data within ABCT. The Bradley A2 ODS-SA version includes enhancements such as splinter proofs and attachment points for hinged armored screens introduced after the Desert Storm operation in 1990-1991 years, plus the same features as the A3 version, including a laser range finder, GPS and navigation system.


Bradley A2 ODS-SA Option

Two initiatives by the US Army to replace Bradley in recent years have come to nothing. The first project was the Future Combat Systems FCS (Future Combat Systems) program, according to which the Manned Ground Vehicle (MGV) ground combat vehicle was to be deployed, including the XM1206 armored personnel carrier, which was supposed to be armed with a MK44 gun and an 7,62-mm machine gun, to transport two crew members and nine paratroopers. The budget cuts in 2009 led to the cancellation of the FCS program, without answering the question “could MGV provide sufficient protection against IEDs?”

Later, a project was launched on the Ground Combat Vehicle (GCV) ground combat vehicle, according to which, to replace the M2 Bradley, it was planned to deploy an 2018 BMP starting from 1874. The goal of this program was to develop a BMP with better lethality and ballistic protection than Bradley, better protection from mines and IEDs than MRAP vehicles and off-road traffic comparable to that of the M1 Abrams tank. For this project, a key requirement was put for accommodation in the troop compartment of nine people.

The army in 2011 issued a two-year technology development contract to BAE Systems and General Dynamics Land Systems (GDLS). Facing cuts that would not allow the army to finance immediately the development of a new GCV machine worth 29 billions of dollars and proposals for constructive changes for existing machines, the army decided to abandon the first project in February 2014 of the year.

The Army is funding a phased modernization of the Bradley BMP in accordance with several proposals for structural changes, the first of which is to restore the volume, mass and power and install a new suspension system and lightweight tracks. The second proposal is a more powerful engine, new transmission and new electrical equipment.

In May 2015, the army issued contracts to the companies BAE Systems (28,87 million dollars) and GDLS (28,27 million dollars) to develop the concept of a promising combat vehicle technology for a period up to November 2016. The report of the Deputy Minister of the Army Colonel Michael Williamson to the Senate Armed Forces Committee notes that “the army is investing in science and technology in order to clarify the concepts and ready-made technologies that will develop the requirements for the combat vehicle and reduce the risks of technology integration. This work will support promising infantry fighting vehicles and at the same time maximize the possibilities for translating these technologies into current and future combat vehicles. ”

GDELS company developments

ASCOD infantry fighting vehicle (Austrian-Spanish Cooperative Development - Austrian-Spanish joint development) was developed to meet the common needs of the armies of the two countries in a medium-weight tracked vehicle that combines good durability, mobility, reliability and firepower. Steyr-Daimler-Puch (currently part of General Dynamics European Land Systems (GDELS)) has manufactured Ulan 112 machines for the Austrian army. In turn, in 1992, Spain issued the Santa Barbara Sistemas contract (now also part of GDELS) for manufacturing the first batch of 123 BMP Pizzaro and 21 control points. The BMP version has a twin turret with an 30-mm Mauser MK30-2 cannon and a twin 7,62-mm machine gun, eight paratroopers are accommodated in the car.

In September, 2003, the company GDELS received a contract for the supply of improved machines Pizarro, including 106 BMP, as well as new options for observation, evacuation and engineering. The latest machines of the 2 Stage are supposed to be delivered in the 2016 year. The upgrade includes an improved hull design, full digitization, a new power unit, advanced sensors, and improved stabilization and automatic target tracking.

In the BMP configuration, the Piranha 8x8 machines manufactured by GDELS-Mowag and its related LAV model manufactured by GDLS Canada have been purchased by many countries. The newest generation machine Piranha 5 (the first in the weight category 30 tons) has significantly increased vitality, mobility and firepower compared to previous generations. On this machine several towers were installed. As part of a Canadian melee vehicle project, GDLS installed a modular tower, Rheinmetall Lance, armed with 30-mm MK30-2 / ABM. At IDEX in February 2015, the company GDELS showed the Desert Piranha variant, optimized for the desert and equipped with the X-NUMX / 30-mm Cockerill 40 / 3030 twin-seat tower.

Modernization of the British WARRIOR BMP

The goal of the Warrior WCSP (Warrior Capability Sustainment Program) BMP extension program is to extend the life of the Warrior tracked BMP in the British Army to 2040. Another step forward was made in July, when the Ministry of Defense signed a contract worth 236 million dollars with CTA International on 515 40-mm cannons with Cased Telescoped Armament System (CTAS) telescopic ammunition for the WCSP program and the new scout SV reconnaissance vehicle. Since 1987, the army has received Warrior 789 machines in several versions; relatively recently, they were intensively exploited in Iraq and Afghanistan. The BMP houses three crew members and seven paratroopers in the aft compartment, the vehicle is armed with an unstabilized, reloading 30-mm L21 RARDEN cannon.


The Warrior infantry combat vehicle upgraded as part of the WCSP program

In October 2011, Lockheed Martin UK received a contract worth 225 million pounds for the WCSP demonstration phase, but the Department of Defense still has to issue a contract to upgrade 380 vehicles to recruit six motorized infantry battalions. The company abandoned its original plan to upgrade the existing tower in favor of developing new towers armed with CTAS. The upgraded BMP Warrior is scheduled to go into service at the start of the 2020.

Lockheed Martin and BAE Systems offer Kuwait to upgrade its Desert Warrior 254 machines, which are equipped with a twin tower with a Bushmaster 25 gun.

Italian lines

BMP Freccia 8x8 was developed by a consortium of CIO to meet the needs of the Italian army in the BMP, which could go into service with the motorized infantry units. In turn, armored brigades are armed with tracked infantry fighting vehicles Dardo. In 2006, the Italian army ordered the 172 BMP Freccia, 36 anti-tank installations, 20 commanding and 21 mortar sets. Shipments starting in 2009 must be completed in 2015.


BMP Freccia

On the Freccia BMP, the HITFIST Plus turret was installed, armed with a selective-powered Xeri X-gun with Oerlikon KBA gun with selective power and an 25-mm machine gun paired with it. In 7,62, Rome approved the financing of the second batch of 2014 Freccia vehicles, including the 381 BMP, which are expected to receive upgraded undercarriage and power unit developed by the CIO for the Centauro 261 artillery mounts.

French fashion

Nexter will soon complete the production of the 550 BMP VBCI 8x8 (Véhicule blind de combat d'infanterie) and 150 commander versions for the French army. This configuration 8x8 was chosen in order to get a machine with good mobility and maneuverability, which could operate in the same battle formations with the Leclerc tank, but which would be cheaper compared to tracked BMP, for example AMX-10P (VBCI replaced it ). The VBCI BMP is equipped with a single Dragar turret with an 25-mm cannon, a crew consisting of a driver and an arrow, and a nine-person infantry unit are housed in the car. A modular set of sheets of titanium-steel alloy is mounted to the body of armored aluminum. Earlier this year, the army received the first 95 VBCI vehicles with enhanced armor and additional protection from mines and IEDs. But such an increase in protection did not pass without a trace, this modernization kit increased the mass of the machine from 29 to 32 tons. The French BMP passed military service in Afghanistan, Lebanon and Mali. At IDEX 2015, Nexter showed a VBCI car with a new twin-turret T40 armed with a CTAS 40-mm cannon and a paired 7,62-mm machine gun, which has an anti-tank launcher on each side.


Nexter installed its new twin-turret T40, equipped with CTAS 40-mm gun, on the VBCI BMP

Materials used:
www.janes.com
www.baesystems.com
www.kmweg.de
www.rheinmetall.com
www.patria.fi
www.nexter-group.fr
www.lockheedmartin.co.uk
www.iveco-otomelara.com
Author:
Ctrl Enter

Noticed a mistake Highlight text and press. Ctrl + Enter

43 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. corporal 19 October 2015 06: 55 New
    • 5
    • 0
    +5
    The hell with him, with the chassis, whoever can, and that goes.
    But why do bourgeois have selective-powered guns, and most importantly, programmable ammunition? And we have..... am They are us on the effectiveness of weapons, like a bull to a sheep ....
    Well, we can’t create it ourselves, so faith doesn’t allow to stash or buy technology?

    Comrades, all this is sad crying
    1. Ruslan67 19 October 2015 06: 59 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      Quote: Corporal
      They are us on the effectiveness of weapons, like a bull to a sheep ....

      To hell with horns and howling into the fields? Who are these weapons and where have you tried?
      1. sagitta25 19 October 2015 10: 08 New
        • 2
        • 0
        +2
        For example, America used Iraq twice as a proving ground for its weapons) During the second campaign, as a percentage they used 20% of guided ammunition while Russia in the last war with Georgia only 0,7% or 1,7% well, very, very short few. Who is who, and America is fully testing its armament just like Israel.
    2. cosmos111 19 October 2015 08: 43 New
      • 3
      • 0
      +3
      great article good !!!
      Promising Russian BMP (Kurganets) MUST HAVE:
      strategic and tactical mobility, firepower, situational awareness, network-centric military operations and management within the framework of the international coalition, combat readiness in extreme weather conditions with a minimum material and technical base, and, finally, interfaces with a friend-or-foe identification system, German information and FuInfoSyS C4I management network, with IdZ combat equipment and active defense systems


      without it, in a modern war, THIS (BMP) is just a piece of expensive iron !!!
      1. Forest 19 October 2015 12: 26 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        It is. Only, judging by the video from the Military Acceptance, there is no armor on Kruganets as on previous machines.
        1. IAlex 19 October 2015 15: 07 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          What kind of military acceptance?
          1. S-cream 19 October 2015 16: 40 New
            • 1
            • 0
            +1
            Transmission on the channel "Star". Well, or on their channel on YouTube you can see.
        2. The comment was deleted.
        3. The comment was deleted.
        4. Dimka off 20 October 2015 08: 56 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          Quote: Forest
          Only, judging by the video from the Military Acceptance, there is no armor on Kruganets as on previous machines.

          Well no. The armor is very serious and this is stated in the video. Much is classified. Plus, KAZ is installed on Kurganets.

          1. Forest 21 October 2015 18: 08 New
            • 0
            • 0
            0
            If you rewind the car assembly video, then thick sheets are not visible at all. DZ on such a cardboard can break through the armor.
        5. Dimka off 20 October 2015 08: 59 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          Quote: Forest
          Only, judging by the video from the Military Acceptance, there is no armor on Kruganets as on previous machines

          and here is another video. Of course, data on dynamic protection is classified.
    3. IAlex 19 October 2015 14: 45 New
      • 2
      • 0
      +2
      This is absolutely normal and most importantly logical over the past 25 years. What goals did the state and people set - in general, they achieved these ...
    4. Bobik012 16 October 2017 21: 35 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      Selective Nutrition? - Since 1980, it seems the year at 2A42. Programmable ammunition is not difficult (we already have it) and it’s not dead, there’s more noise about woodwafer, Genosse KAPRAL forgot to mention telescopic ammunition as a weapon capable of turning the world around, considering that for 50 years all BPS calibers from 30 to 125 mm have existed essentially telescopic ammunition. I did not understand what needs to be stolen, what do the Papuans already know how to do?
  2. Zaurbek 19 October 2015 07: 43 New
    • 3
    • 0
    +3
    Selective power on 2a42 is, feed tape on both sides. A programmable fuse is convenient of course, but is it a peacetime PSU and is it suitable for 30mm? It would be necessary to update the range of 30mm AP shells.
    1. Dimka off 20 October 2015 09: 04 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      Quote: Zaurbek
      It would be necessary to update the range of 30mm AP shells.

      There is infa that a 14 mm gun will be installed on the T-30 and a new line of ammunition has been developed for it.
  3. Dimon-chik-79 19 October 2015 13: 27 New
    • 6
    • 0
    +6
    Whatever you say, NATO is "making" us on the "Behs." Of course, somewhere there, “Kurganets” looms over the horizon, but ... while we live yesterday
    1. Норд 19 October 2015 20: 54 New
      • 4
      • 0
      +4
      I do not impose my point of view on anyone, but looking at these sheds with annexes called BMPs I will never believe in their high combat effectiveness. Ordinary armored personnel carriers or missile systems can quite easily drive Aboriginal people armed with small arms in the deserts. But on the battlefield with a comparable enemy, these Pepelians will not support anyone and will be destroyed with special success and enjoyment “thanks” to their barn sizes. Tell me at least one of the BMPs listed above that can withstand the hit of an RPG-29 or Chrysanthemum grenade? There are no such. Then why these howls about reinforced armor protection? And tell me which BMP has better chances to survive on the battlefield and pile up the enemy, Pirana or Puma with 25-30mm cannons or BMP-3 with a 100 / 30mm twin and low silhouette ... Common sense itself shows that if you start a highly protected BMP, it is only at the level of tank protection (as in the IDF), and everything else is half measures and a dead end. I'd really like to hope that in the case of Kurganets, the designers reasoned just like that.
      1. cosmos111 19 October 2015 22: 08 New
        • 2
        • 0
        +2
        Quote: Nord
        but looking at these sheds with extensions called BMPs I will never believe in their high combat effectiveness. Ordinary armored personnel carriers or MPMs may very well drive aborigines armed with small arms in the deserts.

        MCI is purely infantry transport, taking from point A to point B-ALL !!!!

        Armored personnel carriers with machine-gun weapons, how to deal with ATGM operators, militants seated in the ruins of buildings, on armor ... vehicles ???

        for these purposes, and you need a BMP with a small-caliber carcass on the GSh / wheeled chassis ....
        ATK ... Ammunition for 25X137 mm systems play a decisive role. ATK (and its competitor, General Dynamics Ordnance and Tactical Systems), GDOTS, is conducting its own research to produce high-explosive explosive ordnance.
        ATK produces standard 25-mm HE shells and training shells. At the same time, government orders for shells are issued by GDOTS. The latter also produces, armor-piercing subcaliber feathered tracer shells with detachable pallet (APFSDS-T) M919, armor-piercing shells (KE),
        http://www.army-guide.com/rus/article/article_1054.html


        30 mm Bushmaster III cannon (modern cannon, with air blast ammunition)
        1. IS-80 19 October 2015 22: 25 New
          • 1
          • 0
          +1
          Quote: cosmos111
          30 mm Bushmaster III cannon (modern cannon, with air blast ammunition)

          This is yesterday. 40 mm CTAS is what you need. Although I prefer the 45 mm gun.
          1. cosmos111 20 October 2015 06: 59 New
            • 1
            • 0
            +1
            Quote: IS-80
            It's already yesterday

            we WOULD have such a "yesterday" ....
            Quote: IS-80
            . 40 mm CTAS that's what you need

            we have at the moment, only 57 mm ....
            Quote: IS-80
            Although I prefer the 45 mm gun.

            developed, but about the test information did not see ...
            1. Dimka off 20 October 2015 09: 06 New
              • 0
              • 0
              0
              Quote: cosmos111
              we have at the moment, only 57 mm ...

              Just laughing
          2. Bobik012 16 October 2017 21: 39 New
            • 0
            • 0
            0
            Explain the advantage of your prodigy. No other than the price :-)))
      2. Bobik012 16 October 2017 21: 38 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        Kurgan warriors and rejected on these criteria barn size and armor neither your nor ours
  4. Ingvar 72 19 October 2015 14: 32 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    Someone explain to me not far - I always thought that the BMP is tracked, and the armored personnel carrier. And here are such feints with wheeled infantry fighting vehicles. request
    1. IAlex 19 October 2015 14: 58 New
      • 2
      • 0
      +2
      It doesn’t matter, the BMP is a truck delivering infantry to the meat grinder, and the BMP not only delivers but also supports it during the meat grinder, so tracks are usually placed on the BMP so that fragments and bullets do not ridicule and immobilize the equipment on the battlefield, and usually they have better sights and a slightly larger thickness of armor ...
      1. S-cream 19 October 2015 16: 42 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        The first one you probably meant was an APC.
    2. cosmos111 19 October 2015 17: 49 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      Quote: Ingvar 72
      I always thought that the BMP is tracked, and the APC is wheeled. And then such feints with wheeled infantry fighting vehicles


      everything is written in the article ....
      The 8x8 configuration was chosen in order to get a car with good mobility and cross-country ability, which could operate in the same combat formations with the Leclerc tank, but which would be cheaper compared to tracked infantry fighting vehicles, for example AMX-10P

      it all depends on the application tactics and the expected theater of operations ....
      why wheeled ??? francs are going to nightmare the Papuans in Africa ... there goose / high cross is not needed there, mobility and a large turnaround time are needed ....
      Scandinavians, choose tracked CV-90 ....
      all modern BBM, modular type, GSH, wheeled multipurpose ...
      1. Per se. 19 October 2015 19: 41 New
        • 4
        • 0
        +4
        Quote: cosmos111
        it all depends on the application tactics and the expected theater of operations ....
        Perhaps this is the most important thing that you noted. When they write that “while NATO is“ making us ”on“ Behs ”(comment above from Dimon-chik-79), I would like to ask what kind of“ Behs ”they are“ doing ”on us, when is it“ Bradley ”,“ Worrior or Marder were the best in the world? The concept of BMP appeared in the USSR, in relation to our doctrine, and our geography. Compare BMP-1 / 2 / 3 with the same "Bradley" is not correct, but when comparing, even the "two", especially modernized, is preferable for Russia. To start thoughtlessly producing a semblance of a “Bradley” or a French wheeled monster is hardly a smart decision. The whole feature of the BMP in its versatility, which is perfectly embodied in the BMP-3 and its modifications, and the idea itself gave rise to the BMD, the best of which was the BMD-4M. If the purpose of the armored personnel carrier is mainly military transport, the infantry fighting vehicle is also equipped with enhanced fire support, for which you have to sacrifice something. In this sense, a heavy infantry fighting vehicle will always be weaker than an infantry fighting vehicle, when, after infantry is dismounted, it will begin to carry out fire support functions, and is worse than an armored personnel carrier in transport functions. In addition, if a heavy infantry fighting vehicle climbs near the tanks, then its defeat will lead to the death of not only the crew, but also the dismounted troops. Therefore, if we talk about heavy equipment on a tank base and next to tanks, the BMPT duo (like the BMP first created in our country) and heavy armored personnel carriers (for example, based on BMO-T) look ideal. One machine specializes in fire support, the second in the delivery of troops (without getting ahead of tanks and BMPT). In both cases, you can use the well-developed and reliable base T-72 / T-90.
        1. cosmos111 19 October 2015 20: 16 New
          • 3
          • 0
          +3
          Quote: Per se.
          NATO's "Beham" so far

          on behi, if we take "pure iron", then I think that NO ...
          they make us by:
          1 small-caliber ammunition, with air / remote detonation ...
          Xnumx.instrumentation, situational awareness ...
          3 network-centric technology ...
          4. we do not have a single management information network ...
          there was no MTO in a single unit, in the "Kurgan" is ...
          Quote: Per se.
          BMP-3 and its modifications

          in the modification "Dragoon" with BM AU-220M with 57-mm automatic gun AVT hi
          100 mm with such reservation, when hit by an RPG, 100%, detonation and *** the crew ...
          Quote: Per se.
          the best of which was the BMD-4M

          very controversial armored infantry fighting vehicle, BMP-3, in the Dragoon modification in 18 tons, could very well fit as the main infantry fighting vehicle (unification with army will reduce operating costs and reduce the cost of armored personnel carriers)
          Quote: Per se.
          for example, based on BMO-T). ABOUT

          I agree ... in heavy teams .... BUT the territory of Russia + the CIS, not Israel, the theater of war, maybe from the deserts of Middle Asia, to the Arctic ...
          Therefore, SR. BMP on the GSH and the wheeled chassis are simply necessary ....
    3. Vladimir 1964 19 October 2015 18: 49 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      Quote: Ingvar 72
      Someone explain to me not far - I always thought that the BMP is tracked, and the armored personnel carrier. And here are such feints with wheeled infantry fighting vehicles.


      Igor, the BMP, in addition to transporting the assault force, also provides its fire support (usually a gun from 23 to 57 mm), the BRT is designed only for transportation, and accordingly self-defense weapons (machine guns of various calibers). However (according to the National Interest magazine), such a classification existed somewhere until the end of the last century, and is currently not relevant. As for the present time, the range of opinions is so wide that it is probably difficult to answer your question. In the same magazine, one weirdo presented a version of the dependence of weight and chassis, but it does not withstand any criticism. The Israeli heavy armored personnel carrier (based on the T-55) is armed only with a machine gun, and our BTR-82A is three times lighter and wheeled, armed with a 30 mm cannon.

      Something like this, Dear. hi
      1. Hello 19 October 2015 19: 04 New
        • 5
        • 0
        +5
        Quote: Vladimir 1964
        In the same magazine, one weirdo presented a version of the dependence of weight and chassis, but it does not withstand any criticism. The Israeli heavy armored personnel carrier (based on the T-55) is armed only with a machine gun, and our BTR-82A is three times lighter and wheeled, armed with a 30 mm cannon.

        Here, it seems to me that the use strategy matters. The majority of Soviet-Russian equipment was created for a powerful strike on a probable enemy to the west, the main thing is a quick strike. From here, it seems to me both speed and cannon weapons per armored vehicle, because with a quick strike there is a high probability of running into retreating but still combat-ready units of the enemy. Israel proceeds from a different concept. Due to the size of the country and the constant numerical superiority of the probable enemy, the safety of the crew was paramount. In addition, I al project with the gun was but was abandoned military to too brave commanders not eager to attack forward Batko, and the coffin technology and landing.
        hi
        1. IS-80 19 October 2015 19: 39 New
          • 1
          • 0
          +1
          Quote: Hello
          In addition, I heard that there was a project with a cannon, but the military refused it, so that too brave commanders would not rush to attack the father, and ruin the equipment and the landing.

          A strange point of view. Then, according to this logic, it’s necessary to take the cannon away from the tankers, otherwise it’s all of a sudden they will rush forward without cover and will ruin both themselves and the equipment, which is still very expensive. smile
          1. Per se. 19 October 2015 20: 01 New
            • 3
            • 0
            +3
            Quote: IS-80
            A strange point of view. Then according to this logic tankers need to take away the gun
            What is strange in this point of view, and where are the tankmen? Israel very competently uses the features of its political position and its geography, according to which the Merkava is an ideal tank for the IDF. As for the voiced concept of the use of motorized infantry, for all its security, "Namer" is not an infantry fighting vehicle, but an armored personnel carrier, which should not climb ahead of tanks. How many critics had to read that on the BMPT there were already 5 (five!) Crew members, supposedly, if they were right, so five would die instead of three tankers. And, right there, cheers T-15, which should go next to the tanks, and no one cares that more than a dozen people die if it is defeated if the landing party does not have time to dismount. After familiarizing themselves with the BMPT, the Israelis became very interested in this machine; one must think that creating their BMPT on the basis of the “Namer” would not be difficult for them. If we talk about a heavy infantry fighting vehicle, then this is probably a good "police tank", equipment for the special forces of the Ministry of Internal Affairs, but it is unlikely that the army machine for the big war and the features of Russia in such a war.
            1. IS-80 19 October 2015 20: 11 New
              • -3
              • 0
              -3
              Quote: Per se.
              What is strange in this point of view, and where are the tankmen?

              Well, what do you mean? With a gun. Suddenly, the commander will feel like an invincible sword and shield of Israel and will rush into the attack without cover.
              Quote: Per se.
              then, with all its security, the "Intent" is not an armored personnel carrier, but an armored personnel carrier, which should not climb ahead of tanks.

              I am aware of Cap.
              Quote: Per se.
              After familiarizing themselves with the BMPT, the Israelis became very interested in this machine; one must think that creating their BMPT on the basis of the “Namer” would not be difficult for them.

              We will see. But most likely, such a machine will be experimental maximum since it’s necessary to break down the regular structure of units to cut through tactics and other things, and they’re conservative people in the military and don’t like it. Don’t touch it.
              1. Hello 19 October 2015 20: 40 New
                • 0
                • 0
                0
                Quote: IS-80
                Well, what do you mean? With a gun. Suddenly, the commander will feel like an invincible sword and shield of Israel and will rush into the attack without cover.

                That is why they did not make the cannon version, everyone should be engaged in their work.
                1. IS-80 19 October 2015 20: 52 New
                  • 1
                  • 0
                  +1
                  Quote: Hello
                  That is why they did not make the cannon version, everyone should be engaged in their work.

                  And completely in vain. With a gun it would be better. You can flop and support your own immediately, and not wait until they arrive or artillery with tanks will be shot. In addition, not everywhere artillery and aircraft are convenient and possible.
                  1. Hello 19 October 2015 21: 39 New
                    • 2
                    • 0
                    +2
                    Quote: IS-80
                    And completely in vain. With a gun it would be better. You can flop and support your own immediately, and not wait until they arrive or artillery with tanks will be shot. In addition, not everywhere artillery and aircraft are convenient and possible.

                    You see, it’s not their job to go berserk; the main task is to deliver the infantry as close as possible to the battle. hi
                    1. IS-80 19 October 2015 21: 56 New
                      • 1
                      • 0
                      +1
                      Quote: Hello
                      You see, it’s not their job to go berserk; the main task is to deliver the infantry as close as possible to the battle.

                      Why, then, you can’t flop? The machine is nearby, and heavily armored, which can carry a decent gun. Why can’t it be used for support? After all, it’s sometimes precious, not even minutes, but seconds.
                      1. Hello 19 October 2015 22: 32 New
                        • 0
                        • 0
                        0
                        Quote: IS-80
                        Why, then, you can’t flop?

                        I already wrote about this dear
                        so that too brave commanders do not rush to attack the father, and do not ruin the equipment and landing.
                      2. IS-80 19 October 2015 23: 31 New
                        • 2
                        • 0
                        +2
                        Quote: Hello
                        I already wrote about this dear

                        Brave commanders will still rush to attack even with a gun, even with a machine gun, even without them. This argument is just as fictitious as the arguments of our pre-revolutionary officials regarding the waste of cartridges in the soldier models of the Nagan revolver.
          2. Vladimir 1964 19 October 2015 21: 06 New
            • 1
            • 0
            +1
            Quote: Per se.
            What is strange in this point of view, and where are the tankmen?


            Interesting comment, Sergey. hi
      2. Vladimir 1964 19 October 2015 21: 04 New
        • 1
        • 0
        +1
        Quote: Hello
        so that too brave commanders do not rush to attack the father, and do not ruin the equipment and landing.


        Good phrase, Ilya, the original version, and probably has a right to exist. Well, essentially the commentary in general, perhaps here you are right, in general, it probably is, it is difficult to argue. hi
  • TIO1969 19 October 2015 15: 42 New
    • 2
    • 0
    +2
    Thanks to the author for the review. I want to believe that there will be a continuation. After all, not even all NATO countries are covered in the publication. At the same time, there are projects that are not related to NATO projects (Finland-South Africa).
    For completeness, the BMP projects of Turkey would still be shown.
    1. cosmos111 19 October 2015 19: 02 New
      • 2
      • 0
      +2
      22 September 2015 year in the American city of Quantico (Virginia), the annual exhibition and symposium Modern Day Marine, Lockheed Martin Corporation for the first time introduced a wheeled BVM Amphibious Combat Vehicle (ACV) for KMP SySyA

      Lockheed Martin participated in the competition for the Marine Personnel Carrier (MPC) program / with 2014 of the year as APC ....

      initially jointly, Lockheed Martin developed the BBM in conjunction with the Finnish group Patria, the Havoc armored personnel carrier - a modified version of the famous Patria AMV machine ....
      BUT in 2014, Patria refused to continue participating in the APC program ...

      BTR Lockheed Martin APC was developed with the participation of Merrill Aviation & Defense (Corps), Horstman (suspension) and Caterpillar (MTO)

      Lockheed Martin APC has a combat weight of over -20 tons, a Caterpillar diesel engine with an output of -711 l / s., With automatic transmission, 60 mph highway speed, afloat using two water cannons - 5 nodes ...
      1. The comment was deleted.
      2. cosmos111 19 October 2015 19: 39 New
        • 3
        • 0
        +3
        Quote: cosmos111
        22 September 2015 of the year in the American city of Quantico (Virginia) the annual exhibition and symposium Modern Day Marine


        BAE Systems / Iveco LVW-1 (Superav)

        General Dynamics Piranha ACV


        STK / SAIC Terrex 2

        http://naval.dfns.net/2015/09/25/photo-from-modern-day-marine-2015/
  • glavnykarapuz 19 October 2015 18: 50 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    Of all the BMP described by the author, the German version (Puma) looks the most perfect. Especially in terms of booking and SLA with an uninhabited tower. The only minus the price. Although the Swedish version is not much worse (but again the price).
    I hope with Kurganets and BMPT on the basis of Armata they will not be over the top with the price.
  • Vladimir 1964 19 October 2015 18: 51 New
    • 2
    • 0
    +2
    The article is simply magnificent, I have not read it with such interest for a long time. Many thanks to the author, very informative. hi
    1. bairat 19 October 2015 19: 37 New
      • 2
      • 0
      +2
      Still to add data on the reservation in general would be fine.
      1. Vladimir 1964 19 October 2015 19: 39 New
        • 2
        • 0
        +2
        Quote: bairat
        Still to add data on the reservation in general would be fine.


        I agree, Dear Airat. hi
  • tchoni 19 October 2015 20: 10 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    But to be honest - I do not understand BMP as a class of armored vehicles. An attempt to cross a bulldog with a rhino, i.e. An armored personnel carrier with a tank, it seems to me, was initially doomed to failure. You’d be welcome back in the thirties, of the last century, when anti-tank weapons and tactics of their use existed in their infancy - no, the 20th of the next ...
    I know. that with this idea he already got all the fans of motorized rifle troops on this site, but, I repeat again. probably the thirtieth time: “On a modern battlefield, steam from a tank and a heavy armored personnel carrier steers. The first crushes enemy firing points, the second delivers infantry with minimal losses to the mission’s mission on the battlefield and provides logistic support." And if you need a light support machine - take a robot and arm it. Sniff them from the same TBTR operator controls.
    1. venaya 19 October 2015 20: 58 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      Quote: tchoni
      And if you need a light support machine - take a robot and arm it

      I don’t think that the difference between an armored personnel carrier and an infantry fighting vehicle, more in the name and not at stake weak weight, no grief and equipping them with a small high-speed automatic robotic gun, clearly does not hurt. As a matter of fact, both that and another, there is nothing more than an armored bus for transporting personnel in conditions of increased danger to him. Using a separate robot will also not hurt, but not using armored vehicles as a carrier of not very heavy weapons is surprisingly and rather not rational, from any point of view.
      1. tchoni 21 October 2015 19: 08 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        Quote: venaya
        I don’t think that the difference between an armored personnel carrier and an infantry fighting vehicle is more in the name and not at stake weak weight, not grief and equip them with a small high-speed automatic robotic gun,

        No, it doesn’t. difference in purpose. BTR - carries. BMP - is fighting. The presence of a gun will prompt the commanding staff to send an armored personnel carrier to fight instead of fulfilling its main functions .. In addition, serious artillery requires a serious SLA. This leads to an increase in the cost of the entire structure ...
    2. cosmos111 19 October 2015 21: 30 New
      • 3
      • 0
      +3
      Quote: tchoni
      But to be honest - I do not understand BMP as a class of armored vehicles.


      in Tsakhal, they also do not understand and use MBT + BTR (M113) / BTR-T, which would not be offered by Rafael (Samson 30 Mk2 DBM, ATK MK44 gun with 30 mm caliber, etc.)) are not accepted for service ... such tactics ....
      Quote: tchoni
      An attempt to cross a bulldog with a rhino, i.e. Armored personnel carrier with a tank,

      THIS, if you install an 100 mm gun on an infantry fighting vehicle ....

      the small-caliber guns Flak 30 auf on the Sd.Kfz 10 / 4 armored personnel carrier, were also used by the Wehrmacht in the Second World War, they worked on lightly armored BT and T-26 and infantry ...

      Quote: tchoni
      "On a modern battlefield, steam from a tank and a heavy armored personnel carrier steers.

      in urban development and the breakthrough of layered defense -YES ...

      and what will they drive the homeless in the desert in Syria and here in Middle Asia ...

      on tanks and BTR-T for small groups ??? is it for these purposes that wheeled infantry fighting vehicles with 30-57 mm guns are needed ...
      1. tchoni 21 October 2015 19: 13 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        Quote: cosmos111
        and what will they drive the homeless in the desert in Syria and here in Middle Asia ...

        There is aviation for this. And only aviation. And the experience is excellent - the experience of Afghanistan. moreover, aviation is not only shock. but also the transport component. In Chechnya, the “mobile block post” put up with the help of aviation justified itself quite well. Now here is Syria.
        And if he was about to send a ground group, then for this purpose in the army of the Russian Federation at the moment there is a good series of MPD “typhoon” .. + all kinds of “tigers” there. Yes, and to discard the old BTR-70-80 in the scrap while in full force is not worth it.
    3. Disant 20 October 2015 02: 49 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      again you are old.
      they came up with everything before us and for us. all counted.
      Well, we cannot now line up the galactic battlecruisers and cover them three in a row with one Death Star.
      In one place of asteroids we can’t stand a lot of the line, in another the distance between the planets does not allow us to taxi, in the third - the hyperdrive does not work due to gravitational disturbances ...
      .
      you are an incorrigible idealist
      1. cosmos111 20 October 2015 07: 06 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        Quote: Disant
        you are an incorrigible idealist

        That's for sure....
      2. tchoni 21 October 2015 19: 28 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        I am not an idealist. I'm realist. Because, as I had never suggested, anyone would transfer all motorized rifles of the Russian Federation to tank troops and rename them panzergrenadiers :-)
        In the army, everything must be balanced.
        There should be tank divisions (brigades) in which the T-BTR - full-time equipment and infantry are included in the platoon (say two tanks + 2 TBR + 20 infantry - platoon (just an option, it might even be better if the tank is one)) - the task - assault actions - in the city, in the field, is not important (in this regard, it is thought that the divisions should have specialization)
        There should be motorized rifle units equipped with equipment based on a standard army vehicle (including armored vehicles for transporting personnel). Saturated with a large number of anti-aircraft and anti-tank weapons. Their task is to ensure the retention of already occupied lines, control of the flanks of the group, in the event of a breakthrough or lack of front - a swift offensive. (the inclusion of special engineering units is mandatory, giving the army and reconnaissance aircraft, so the way of organizing in the form of a brigade seems more successful here)
        Internal troops are based on the same standard army car, with only a slightly different way of organizing. less heavy weapons and a certain training of personnel. focused on interaction with the "civilian" population. (primarily engineer units, EW and RTR units, a small number of aviation are attached. form of organization, the same it seems that the brigade, but I don’t know there)
        Well, let’s say, units with special tasks, such as the Airborne Forces, the Marines and Special Forces. Here, both the form of organization and equipment must be special and meet the goals and objectives of the units.
  • Disant 20 October 2015 03: 41 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    by article:
    in the first photo BMP M2A3 Bradley
    - bag for armor - this is something new. apparently instead of mounted armor
    - The rear hatch is excellent. how does he rise?
    - fucking big du.ra (the whole structure)
    German cougar (photo of two cars)
    - unusual, and I would even say beautifully and intimidatingly. technically
    Photo LAV III Canadian Army production company GDLS Canada
    - Can he fire in the back hemisphere? the rear piling doesn’t interfere? looks like hello from the sixties.
    photo BMV AMV-Rosomak
    - the language doesn’t turn to be called terrible BMP .. (they’ll fill the price)
  • Volga Cossack 20 October 2015 07: 58 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    as a general ozbor a good article ........... but alas, nothing new.
  • Yak28 20 October 2015 22: 34 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Why do some BMPs be made so high, are there soldiers or something like holding a handrail on the bus. The high profile makes the BMP a good target for a grenade launcher, and you can’t hide everywhere on the ground.
    1. iAi
      iAi 23 October 2015 19: 25 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      Some BMPs are made high so that it is convenient to shoot on top of the terrain screen itself.
      More height means roominess, convenience and comfort.) yes