Italian technology for Boomerang?
Recently, the media reported that the Russian Army had abandoned the domestic BTR-90 in favor of the as yet undeveloped light armored "Boomerang", which in turn is planned to be created in the coming years. The budget has already allocated 10 billion rubles for its development, and according to the plan, the developers of the armored vehicle should submit it already in 2015. It also became known that the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation decided to purchase more than 1,5 thousand Italian-made Iveco LMV M65 Lynx armored cars. According to representatives of the Ministry of Defense, this will allow Russia to get the production technology of the suspension and engines for the future modular armored car "Boomerang." The fact that it was planned to establish joint production of armored vehicles in the amount of 500 vehicles per year with Iveco in the year became known in 2010, however, no one expected this turn of events.
It would seem that priority should be given to domestic manufacturers, and the adoption of foreign models of military equipment, in particular NATO countries, for the Russian Army’s arsenal should be in line with common sense. It should be understood that these countries are positioning Russia as a potential adversary, and the purchase of their weapons strengthens the economies of the NATO countries and at the same time weakens the Russian ones. It is also necessary to decide how and what combat tasks the foreign model will perform, and most importantly, how much our military needs it and whether it meets the requirements and standards set for domestic military equipment. Also an important factor is the possibility of unification of the “foreigner” with similar domestic samples. The allegations that Russia is no longer capable of producing even its own armored vehicles are not yet believed. The same "Tiger", in my opinion, although not a masterpiece of the domestic defense industry, still surpasses the Italian model in many respects.
I think many people saw a video in the network, filmed during last year's comparative tests in Bronnitsy, where it is clearly seen that the driving characteristics of Iveco are much worse than those of Tiger. However, the tests were completed ahead of time, and according to their results, for some reason, the Italian sample was recognized as “successfully passed” (?). Then in June 2010 of the year, according to the order of the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation, is adopted by the Russian Army. Further, the technologies allegedly acquired together with an armored car: the ceramic armor used on it is made in Germany, then in Italy it is supplemented with high-strength polyethylene produced in Holland. The technology of its manufacture was not sold even to the Americans, they would not sell it to us under any circumstances. The strength of armor, which, according to Italian manufacturers, meets the latest standards and requirements, should be clarified - the requirements of NATO. According to these standards, armor is not considered punched, if 50% minus one hit did not lead to a breakthrough, break or crack.
According to Russian standards, at least one hit is considered breaking, after which a crack is formed in the armor. That is, if 10 hits from 4 hits armor, then all the same, according to NATO standards, is not pierced. If the crew + landing LMV M65 Lynx is 5 people, then one store SVD, equipped with armor-piercing cartridges with B-32, is enough to disable almost all crew members and troops. However, the armor protection of the car corresponds to the norm ... The temperature range of operation of the Italian machine from -32 to + 47, according to this indicator, it does not meet the requirements for domestic armored vehicles, the temperature range for which is from -50 to + 50, nevertheless military officials ignored This is what the LMV M65 Lynx came into service. At very low temperatures, ceramic armor plates simply break up when they hit even non-armor-piercing bullets. On this occasion, the question arises: how is it planned to repair damaged armor plates? Or dependence on a foreign manufacturer (read - a potential enemy, a member of NATO) is not a weakening of the defense capacity of their own country? Then this is not just a thirst for profit, but a real diversion.
Unlike the "Tiger", on which two fighters can simultaneously fire through the hatch, only one fighter can do it on the Iveco. Also the lack of loopholes for shooting from personal weapons is a big minus. In addition, it should be noted extremely unfortunate accommodation of the crew and landing force, the landing force is placed in the landing module isolated from the control module. Given the weak armor and the inability to move from the landing compartment into the control compartment, without leaving the car, it is not difficult to guess what this means for all crew members in a real battle if the driver is killed or seriously injured.
The cost of an armored car LMV M65 Lynx, depending on the configuration, ranges from 256 000 to 461 000 euro, and the cost of a domestic armored car "Tiger" is not more than 5 million rubles. How much you can build on the money of domestic armored vehicles, not inferior to foreign counterparts, is easy to calculate.
It would seem that priority should be given to domestic manufacturers, and the adoption of foreign models of military equipment, in particular NATO countries, for the Russian Army’s arsenal should be in line with common sense. It should be understood that these countries are positioning Russia as a potential adversary, and the purchase of their weapons strengthens the economies of the NATO countries and at the same time weakens the Russian ones. It is also necessary to decide how and what combat tasks the foreign model will perform, and most importantly, how much our military needs it and whether it meets the requirements and standards set for domestic military equipment. Also an important factor is the possibility of unification of the “foreigner” with similar domestic samples. The allegations that Russia is no longer capable of producing even its own armored vehicles are not yet believed. The same "Tiger", in my opinion, although not a masterpiece of the domestic defense industry, still surpasses the Italian model in many respects.
I think many people saw a video in the network, filmed during last year's comparative tests in Bronnitsy, where it is clearly seen that the driving characteristics of Iveco are much worse than those of Tiger. However, the tests were completed ahead of time, and according to their results, for some reason, the Italian sample was recognized as “successfully passed” (?). Then in June 2010 of the year, according to the order of the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation, is adopted by the Russian Army. Further, the technologies allegedly acquired together with an armored car: the ceramic armor used on it is made in Germany, then in Italy it is supplemented with high-strength polyethylene produced in Holland. The technology of its manufacture was not sold even to the Americans, they would not sell it to us under any circumstances. The strength of armor, which, according to Italian manufacturers, meets the latest standards and requirements, should be clarified - the requirements of NATO. According to these standards, armor is not considered punched, if 50% minus one hit did not lead to a breakthrough, break or crack.
According to Russian standards, at least one hit is considered breaking, after which a crack is formed in the armor. That is, if 10 hits from 4 hits armor, then all the same, according to NATO standards, is not pierced. If the crew + landing LMV M65 Lynx is 5 people, then one store SVD, equipped with armor-piercing cartridges with B-32, is enough to disable almost all crew members and troops. However, the armor protection of the car corresponds to the norm ... The temperature range of operation of the Italian machine from -32 to + 47, according to this indicator, it does not meet the requirements for domestic armored vehicles, the temperature range for which is from -50 to + 50, nevertheless military officials ignored This is what the LMV M65 Lynx came into service. At very low temperatures, ceramic armor plates simply break up when they hit even non-armor-piercing bullets. On this occasion, the question arises: how is it planned to repair damaged armor plates? Or dependence on a foreign manufacturer (read - a potential enemy, a member of NATO) is not a weakening of the defense capacity of their own country? Then this is not just a thirst for profit, but a real diversion.
Unlike the "Tiger", on which two fighters can simultaneously fire through the hatch, only one fighter can do it on the Iveco. Also the lack of loopholes for shooting from personal weapons is a big minus. In addition, it should be noted extremely unfortunate accommodation of the crew and landing force, the landing force is placed in the landing module isolated from the control module. Given the weak armor and the inability to move from the landing compartment into the control compartment, without leaving the car, it is not difficult to guess what this means for all crew members in a real battle if the driver is killed or seriously injured.
The cost of an armored car LMV M65 Lynx, depending on the configuration, ranges from 256 000 to 461 000 euro, and the cost of a domestic armored car "Tiger" is not more than 5 million rubles. How much you can build on the money of domestic armored vehicles, not inferior to foreign counterparts, is easy to calculate.
Information