Military Review

BMMP Platform for Marines

66
Last year was rich in Russian weapons premieres. Among them is a model of a promising marine infantry fighting vehicle (BMMP), presented under the code "BMMP Platform", presented at a naval salon in St. Petersburg, reports Messenger of Mordovia.


BMMP Platform for Marines


The layout appeared as a result of the announced competition for the work on the topic “Research on the creation of a promising platform for the naval infantry units” fleet».

“With a weight in 30 t 700 kg, it should hold three crew members and 10 paratroopers. The fighting compartment is of the same type with what is installed on the BMP-3: 100-mm gun, an 30-mm cannon paired with it, as well as a machine gun of the 7,62 mm caliber, ”the newspaper writes.

The length of the machine - 9 m, width - 3,4 m, height - 2,94 m, clearance - 450 mm.

“The vehicle will have a water jet propulsion unit, a special transformable body to reduce hydrodynamic drag. Thanks to the powerful gas turbine engine GTD-1250 with a capacity of 1250 hp, which has proven itself well on "flying tanks"T-80U, BMMP will be capable of developing a maximum speed on land of at least 55 km / h", - the author of the article, Lev Romanov, gives the characteristics.

According to him, "when driving on water at sea waves to 2 balls and a wave height of 75 cm, she will be able to carry out continuous movement at a speed of at least 37 km / h."

These characteristics will allow the Marines to carry out the so-called “over-the-horizon landing”, “when the floating combat vehicles leave their ships en masse at a distance of 40-60 km from the coast and go at maximum speed to landing areas,” the author notes.

According to Romanov, referring to Russian experts, "the creation and adoption of such military equipment will dramatically increase the capabilities of the Russian marines."
Photos used:
Brave2004
66 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. dchegrinec
    dchegrinec 3 February 2016 13: 32
    +4
    It creates something terrifying the enemy. They will run at one sight! wassat
    1. Uncle VasyaSayapin
      Uncle VasyaSayapin 3 February 2016 13: 48
      +4
      Just a normal car, capable of capturing the coast. Now the marines for landing can only "close" to the coast, substituting themselves under fire from artillery and tanks, firing direct fire. It is possible to use the available technology only against very poor tribes, pacifists or countries with a huge coastline and not having the ability to defend it. And I want to land in those places where the enemy is available, although he does not have a strong defense, and not the devil knows what wilderness, so that then a day on the road to get to the place of the combat mission.
      1. sso-xnumx
        sso-xnumx 3 February 2016 14: 10
        +4
        Quote: Uncle VasyaSayapin
        Just a normal car, capable of capturing the shore.

        May be so. But where to get so much aviation kerosene for gas turbine engines at the landing site? Customize a tanker to shore?
        1. iConst
          iConst 3 February 2016 14: 22
          +2
          Quote: sso-250659
          May be so. But where to get so much aviation kerosene for gas turbine engines at the landing site? Customize a tanker to shore?
          - The same thought. Everyone is already abandoning GTEs in favor of "standard" diesels.

          What is the reason? In such operations (landing), IMHO, the power reserve is an important factor.

          If, of course, the task is to organize a bridgehead tens of kilometers deep - then, it’s not critical.
        2. semuil
          semuil 3 February 2016 15: 28
          +1
          But where to get so much aviation kerosene for gas turbine engines at the landing site?
          Actually, if my memory serves me right, this engine is multi-fuel, eats everything that burns and starts up with big minuses with a half kick. But where to get so many engines is a question. And is such power needed in essence for an BMP?
          1. sso-xnumx
            sso-xnumx 4 February 2016 11: 41
            0
            Quote: semuil
            Actually, if my memory serves me right, this engine is multi-fuel, eats everything that burns

            I once raised this question in a conversation with armored engineers (zampotechs) and they explained to me that even though the engine is called multi-fuel (even a diesel, even a gas turbine engine), it needs the type of fuel for which it was created for normal operation. If conventional diesel fuel is used on a gas turbine engine, power drops, work surfaces will coke and, as a result, a sharp decrease in resource. On the T-80, the task was initially to jerk to the English Channel, i.e. consumables, who breaks through is right! And in this case, with BMMP, I personally would not really like the car to be fueled by whom it is unknown what died during the march or even worse right in the battle ....
      2. Inok10
        Inok10 3 February 2016 14: 15
        16
        Quote: Uncle VasyaSayapin
        Just a normal car, capable of capturing the coast. Now the marines for landing can only "close" to the coast, substituting themselves under fire from artillery and tanks, firing direct fire. It is possible to use the available technology only against very poor tribes, pacifists or countries with a huge coastline and not having the ability to defend it. And I want to land in those places where the enemy is available, although he does not have a strong defense, and not the devil knows what wilderness, so that then a day on the road to get to the place of the combat mission.

        ... would not be too lazy to read about the BMP 3F .. hi ... 5 minutes of a video about the BMP 3F .. well, what in the picture I don’t even want to comment .. hi
        1. erix-xnumx
          erix-xnumx 3 February 2016 14: 19
          +5
          There is currently no BMP-3F in service with the Russian Marine Corps.
          1. The comment was deleted.
        2. Shadowcat
          Shadowcat 3 February 2016 15: 09
          +1
          It would be something to comment. Very similar to a green blot in a pint

          P.S. Also thought of him.
      3. Shadowcat
        Shadowcat 3 February 2016 15: 07
        +3
        umm ... I’m not catching up with something, but what is the current BMP-3 bad?
        Floats 10 km / h, water cannons are installed inside the hull. Wall 0,7 m, rise 30 and roll 25 degrees. Diesel engine. Track tension is controlled from the driver’s position. Transportability: by rail, road, air and sea. Can swim with minimal training, Wh. immediately, there is a reverse function for swimming, there is a pump for pumping water, the only car in the world firing from water while standing and moving in any direction. On land, it can confidently overcome a slope of 35 degrees. [13] For the first time in the world received a hydromechanical suspension. Floats in a storm up to 5 points
        Of course, the speed is not high, but then there are cover ships this time,
        the possibility of swimming in a 5-point storm is two,
        it’s three diesel engines (as a result, it choked on the sand, dirt, etc. is quite normal for any shore. GTE is several times more sensitive to the quality of filters) and as a result, great economy.
        1. NIKNN
          NIKNN 3 February 2016 20: 55
          +2
          Quote: ShadowCat
          umm ... I’m not catching up with something, but what is the current BMP-3 bad?
          Floats 10 km / h, water cannons are installed inside the hull. Wall 0,7 m, rise 30 and roll 25 degrees. Diesel engine. Track tension is controlled from the driver’s position. Transportability: by rail, road, air and sea. Can swim with minimal training, Wh. immediately, there is a reverse function for swimming, there is a pump for pumping water, the only car in the world firing from water while standing and moving in any direction. On land, it can confidently overcome a slope of 35 degrees. [13] For the first time in the world received a hydromechanical suspension. Floats in a storm up to 5 points
          Of course, the speed is not high, but then there are cover ships this time,
          the possibility of swimming in a 5-point storm is two,
          it’s three diesel engines (as a result, it choked on the sand, dirt, etc. is quite normal for any shore. GTE is several times more sensitive to the quality of filters) and as a result, great economy.


          I agree with you!
          Add prepared production facilities here.
          Minimum R&D expenses (it makes sense to try to increase the speed of the nodes preferably to 10-12, I think this is real, well, what else is specific to the application) hi
      4. tilovaykrisa
        tilovaykrisa 3 February 2016 17: 14
        +2
        And right now on BTR82 are able to land in 10km
        1. Kadex
          Kadex 3 February 2016 18: 05
          +1
          Quote: tilovaykrisa
          And right now on BTR82 are able to land in 10km

          And when he swims to the shore, and if still under fire? In addition, there is no maneuverability on the water.
          1. Shadowcat
            Shadowcat 3 February 2016 18: 42
            +2
            um ... And the support ships are just being driven ashore and caliber more weighty and faster than any tank they trample everything that tries to crumble on the coast into the ground, and this apart from the ammunition they carry + support for the same aviation. Without all this, even if they had a speed of 100 km, there would be no sense from landing on a fortified shore.
            For example, the A-222 stupidly shoots the entire landing force, even going at a speed of 37 km, before they row to the shore.
            P.S. I generally can not find any foreign equipment that can leave the ship, get to the land by swimming and then accompany the infantry further. Maximum combination of barge + equipment.
            P.P.S. I’ve thought about it and I’m wondering how the landing will feel at such a speed and with excitement. If you do not compensate for anything, then there will be no fighters, or a different story about green men.
      5. Per se.
        Per se. 3 February 2016 21: 26
        +1
        Quote: Uncle VasyaSayapin
        Now the marines for landing can only "close" to the coast, substituting themselves under fire from artillery and tanks, firing direct fire.
        Is it an aggregate that "With a weight of 30 t 700 kg, it must accommodate three crew members and 10 paratroopers."will be invulnerable to" tanks firing direct fire "? What is worse than the BMP-3F, from which the Indonesian marines are delighted? Let us recall the data of the BMP-3F.
        The mass of the machine is 18,5 tons, the crew of 3 people, the landing of 7 people. The machine carries powerful weapons: the 100-mm cannon-launcher 2A70, stabilized in two planes and capable of using ATGM 9M117 or 9M117M laser-guided paired with it 30-mm automatic gun 2X72NUMX-2NUMX-3NX7,62 and XNUMX
        It has high maneuverability afloat, can move and fire with the required accuracy when the waves are agitated by force up to 3 and 2 points, respectively. With the engine running, it can stay in water for up to 7 hours and travel at speeds up to 10 km / h. It is able to go ashore in the conditions of a breaking wave and tow the same type of product. The machine has a new main coolant sight with a built-in laser rangefinder and an ATGM control channel.
        The BMMP declares a speed of 37 km / h afloat, without specifying whether using the planing effect or not. "Up to two points", the effect of planing is impossible when the sea agitation intensifies, how much do we gain here as a boat, losing fighting qualities on land, already as a direct combat vehicle? They would immediately make small and high-speed tank landing barges, and would not bother with mastodon hybrids, with an eye on the Yankees. "Over-the-horizon landing", we do not have an expeditionary force to land from across the Atlantic, we have the Caspian, the Baltic, what the hell is over-the-horizon landing? Well, I don’t understand, guys, why the BMP-3F is not allowed into our fleet, why it is impossible to combine, to approach in a complex way ... Where is your mind, your geographic features, your own specifics, everything, like in the United States ...
        1. Shadowcat
          Shadowcat 4 February 2016 10: 40
          +1
          Quote: Per se.
          Where is your mind, its geographical features, its own specifics, everything, just like the USA give ...

          Accustomed to focus on the bare ass looming ahead. Just some sodomites. First in computers, now in technology ....
    2. Blondy
      Blondy 3 February 2016 14: 21
      +8
      In my opinion, the sturgeon will be cut off here. Horizontal landing for thirty miles of gas turbine engine at a speed of under 20 knots, with such contours - how much will it gobble up the fuel? She still has to go by land, a march is some kind of descent, but there is no refueling on the shore.
    3. Misha Honest
      Misha Honest 3 February 2016 19: 11
      0
      Quote: dchegrinec
      It creates something terrifying the enemy. They will run at one sight!

      It is necessary in the Crimea to test these BMMPs - rafting on their own to Odessa. am
  2. ArcanAG
    ArcanAG 3 February 2016 13: 33
    -2
    But what about Kurganets?
    1. Uncle VasyaSayapin
      Uncle VasyaSayapin 3 February 2016 13: 51
      +1
      You read the TTX, it’s not a BMP that can swim on a lake, but a boat capable of being a land-based BMP. And here is Kurganets?
      1. Fregate
        Fregate 3 February 2016 14: 04
        0
        Interestingly, the Americans created something similar for themselves, but refused because of the high cost. How do we deal with this?
        1. The comment was deleted.
        2. The comment was deleted.
        3. Prapor-527
          Prapor-527 3 February 2016 18: 50
          +1
          The strategy of “over-the-horizon landing” was developed by the US Marine Corps in the 1980s, the main reason for developing a new strategy was the desire to protect landing ships from coastal sea mines and coastal defense. The basis of this strategy is landing facilities capable of carrying out “overseas operations,” such as the MV-22 Osprey VTOL, the LCAC hovercraft and the EFV amphibious armored personnel carrier.

          The development of AAAV began in the late 1970s, testing of the first prototypes took place in the early 1980s at the Pendleton military base. Around the same time, a Service Life Enchancement Program (SLEP) was developed, which was in service with the LVTP7, later renamed AAV (AAV-7A1). Initially, AAAV was supposed to enter the army in the mid-1990s, but delays in the program led to the development and adoption of a second program for extending the life of the AAV in 1995, with delays in the delivery of EFV for more than 15 years. Currently, the US Marine Corps expects to begin the deployment of mass production of EFV and the supply of armored personnel carriers to the troops, where they will gradually replace the AAV-7A1. It was originally planned to purchase 1013 EFV cars, but at the moment this number has been reduced to 57, due to the increase in the cost of the program
  3. Not_invented
    Not_invented 3 February 2016 13: 33
    +5
    And where will we land?)
  4. polite people
    polite people 3 February 2016 13: 33
    0
    Our infantry is already afraid. Technology will not hurt them. soldier
    1. PKK
      PKK 3 February 2016 13: 43
      -3
      BMMP is not as scary as its drunk crew! Such karakuts, en masse, from all sides, will easily bite a small greyhound country, such as Qatar.
  5. The comment was deleted.
  6. Lanista
    Lanista 3 February 2016 13: 34
    +9
    300-mm guns paired with it

    Explicit eyepiece. On Bahce paired 30mm.
    Question: But the wheelbase (see. Figure) will the whole farm withstand? 30-ton machines are usually still tracked.
    1. PKK
      PKK 3 February 2016 13: 45
      0
      So she’ll ride a little along the shore, mainly walking on water.
      1. Riv
        Riv 3 February 2016 14: 33
        +4
        Maybe then she did not go ashore at all? The wheels will not be needed ... :)))) And if the snorkel is attached, then it will not be necessary to emerge.

        Well, nonsense! The height is three meters. The Abrams, for comparison, is only 2.2 meters. WHERE IS THIS BARN ??? Are there two-tier bunks for the landing? And they also added a tower. Apparently in order to roll over with wheels more dexterously.
    2. The comment was deleted.
    3. barclay
      barclay 3 February 2016 14: 02
      0
      Among them - a model of a promising marine infantry fighting vehicle (BMMP) presented at a naval salon in St. Petersburg (BMMP))
      I agree. In general, the illustration for the article is very arbitrary and not legible. If only they would have presented a snapshot of this layout. It is still difficult to imagine what is described in the article, except for the already familiar weapons.
  7. Tamod
    Tamod 3 February 2016 13: 35
    0
    300 mm gun is impressive wink
    1. Maksus
      Maksus 3 February 2016 14: 35
      0
      What is the reason for the reluctance of our designers to install 12,7 or 14,5 mm machine guns? Their bullets are able to fight with light armor, which will save ammunition 30mm guns. The price of ammunition is different.
  8. Mountain shooter
    Mountain shooter 3 February 2016 13: 36
    +1
    Armored car on wheels. With a 100 mm cannon - launcher. Strong thing.
  9. kapitan92
    kapitan92 3 February 2016 13: 39
    +8
    “With a weight of 30 tons 700 kg,“ over-the-air landing ”,“ when floating combat vehicles leave their ships en masse at a distance of 40-60 km from the coast ....
    Very interesting! The question arises: Who will carry out the air defense of these vehicles with the landing force 40-60 km from the coast? And if the sea agitation increases during the "sailing" of the machines (... when the sea is up to 2 balls and a wave 75 cm high) ...?
    Of course, a new fighting vehicle for the Marines is needed, but is such a need ????
    1. Uncle VasyaSayapin
      Uncle VasyaSayapin 3 February 2016 14: 02
      0
      Air defense will be provided by a missile cruiser. If at the "coast" the aviation is stronger than the air defense of the missile cruiser, the landing ships near the coast of their air defense BMMP will still not be able to cover.
  10. max702
    max702 3 February 2016 13: 42
    +3
    With 31 tons of weight and an engine of 1250 l / s, the speed will obviously not be 55 km / h .. Unless it is mixed up with speed on the water .. The wheels are vryatli, goose most likely .. Apparently Bahchu and GTE from the t-80u are stuck on the Kurganets. An interesting hybrid will turn out .. The price will really be .. But the Marines with us are very small and will be equipped with 200-300 vehicles by force ..
  11. fa2998
    fa2998 3 February 2016 13: 45
    +4
    Quote: dchegrinec
    It creates something terrifying the enemy. They will run at one sight! wassat

    Well, yes, horror will occur when this 9-meter-long, heavy (30 tons) monster crawls out of the wet sand on wheels! It needs (like seaplanes) a special descent to the water, either asphalt or concrete. laughing hi
    1. Lopatov
      Lopatov 3 February 2016 14: 50
      +3
      I am also in doubt ...
      30 tons, wheels and wet sand are not particularly combined.
      Unless to dump pontoons before going ashore.
  12. lysyj bob
    lysyj bob 3 February 2016 13: 45
    0
    Machine length - 9 m, width - 3,4 m, height - 2,94 m, clearance - 450

    With such dimensions and weight of 30,7 tons, the buoyancy reserve causes some concerns. And the speed of 37 km / h (20 knots) is a bit much, in my opinion, for an armored vehicle.
    1. Andrey Yuryevich
      Andrey Yuryevich 3 February 2016 13: 50
      +3
      “Over-the-air landing”, “when floating combat vehicles leave their ships en masse at a distance of 40-60 km from the coast and at maximum speed go to the landing areas "
      my hair began to move on my head ... by the sea on a tank ... was the author too carried away?
    2. Alexey RA
      Alexey RA 3 February 2016 14: 01
      +1
      Quote: lysyj bob
      And the speed of 37 km / h (20 knots) is a bit much, in my opinion, for an armored vehicle.

      ZBD-2000 and EFV - 45 km / h afloat.
      1. Uncle VasyaSayapin
        Uncle VasyaSayapin 3 February 2016 14: 04
        0
        Exactly, yohany babai!
  13. Maxom75
    Maxom75 3 February 2016 13: 51
    0
    paired 100mm and 30mm cannon + 7,62 machine gun or otherwise in the original source it was like that.
  14. triglav
    triglav 3 February 2016 13: 52
    0
    The idea is good. We will wait for the embodiment.
    1. Tektor
      Tektor 3 February 2016 13: 58
      +1
      What good? This is only for warm latitudes. How can this pepelats come out of the water onto an ice floe? Or is it not intended to overcome water obstacles covered with ice or drifting ice? There must be additional movers in the form of tracks or screws.
      1. Tektor
        Tektor 4 February 2016 11: 05
        0
        Perhaps the situation will be corrected by the addition of a propeller wheel in front, which can be relied upon when leaving the water, including on ice due to the inertia and power of the propellers at the rear. At the same time, this wheel can be equipped with chain weights, like those of mine robots, which will allow mine clearance and overcoming various obstacles, both natural (the same ice hummocks) and erected.
  15. Alexey RA
    Alexey RA 3 February 2016 13: 57
    +3
    Somewhere I've seen this before ... oh yes, EFV is the largest of the failed US Marine Corps programs.
    EMNIP, as a result, the cost of the foreign infantry fighting vehicle of the marines doubled the cost of the "Abrams".
    1. Uncle VasyaSayapin
      Uncle VasyaSayapin 3 February 2016 16: 11
      0
      In the struggle for coastal territories in the Black Sea, the Baltic and the Sea of ​​Japan, such devices are not very relevant, distances along the sea are not very large and it is easier to throw airborne or infantry helicopters (people Mi-17, Technique - Mi-26), but if they want to scare someone overseas, then this BMP will be very relevant.
      1. ProkletyiPirat
        ProkletyiPirat 27 November 2017 16: 29
        0
        Quote: Uncle VasyaSayapin
        but if they want to scare someone overseas, then this BMP will be very relevant.

        Similarly, the Airborne Forces with refueling, and MP through the aircraft carrier-UDC ....
  16. Great-grandfather of Zeus
    Great-grandfather of Zeus 3 February 2016 14: 14
    0
    The model is a good thing, but we could create and test one living prototype in real conditions in order to immediately identify "childhood diseases", as well as learn the advantages and disadvantages of this platform.
  17. common man
    common man 3 February 2016 14: 36
    0
    A wheel propeller for such an ashtray is a very controversial decision. Zero permeability. Would rather go caterpillar, with variable ground clearance. To keep the goose underneath afloat. The water resistance will decrease. GTU is needed for water cannons and speed afloat. Dimensions to increase "buoyancy". In principle, why not. Highly specialized, in a small batch.
  18. Nikolay71
    Nikolay71 3 February 2016 14: 43
    +2
    Some kind of "Monster" in my opinion.
  19. A.Lex
    A.Lex 3 February 2016 14: 44
    0
    Hmm, why wheeled?
  20. chunga-changa
    chunga-changa 3 February 2016 14: 54
    0
    "Mistrals", for which we "have no tasks", land equipment by boats. The technique can be any - tanks, armored personnel carriers, infantry fighting vehicles, self-propelled guns, air defense. Since it was not possible to obtain "this French city", we have to come up with a special technique for disembarking from our usual BODs, because the armored personnel carrier successfully sinks at a wave of 75 cm, which the Kazakhs recently demonstrated.
  21. tchoni
    tchoni 3 February 2016 15: 08
    -1
    Samovar steam locomotive. Definitely. Either swimming will be bad or ride. and, most likely, the only advantage will be a complex of weapons. Because
    1) A wheeled chassis with a mass of thirty tons will most likely not be very passable on soft soils. And this is a very important indicator for a machine operating at a water cut.
    2) Most likely, it will not work to realize normal security with a mass of 30 tons. This is evidenced by the experience of the American "delirium".
    3) The movement principle on the water, most likely, is based on the dynamic principle of maintenance (engine power is excessive for a land vehicle in favor of this). It seems to me that this will lead to low seaworthiness of the device.
    4) Powerful weapons and their ammunition will be located in close proximity to the crew and the landing. that does not add to the car combat stability and resistance to hits.
    As "allaverdy" purely IMHO: it's easier to make a pair of a landing craft and an armored vehicle. Ideally, you can only make a boat, and use standard armored vehicles ...
    Well, sort of everything. We pass, do not be shy :-)
    1. Izotovp
      Izotovp 3 February 2016 19: 44
      +1
      I also wanted to offer something like this: a standard BMP, for example, the T-15 and a disposable boat pallet with two electric water launches with remote control from a BMP, a mechanical drive and a supply of fuel supplied to the BMP engine, which will work during the landing in generator mode. A pallet boat can be made with improved seaworthiness, including a cavitation cavity, plastic to save cost and weight, and cheap, because this is an analogue of a parachute and it’s not worth it to be expensive.
      1. tchoni
        tchoni 3 February 2016 21: 53
        0
        I agree. this is more correct than sculpting a dinosaur. By the way, they did something like that in the USSR. sculpted pontoons to the tank ... It was assumed that such structures could force the lamb ... and these are the same 60 km ...
  22. fa2998
    fa2998 3 February 2016 15: 15
    +2
    Quote: Great-grandfather of Zeus
    to test it in real conditions in order to immediately identify "childhood diseases", as well as to learn the advantages and disadvantages of this plotform.

    Well, there are 2 ways. First, for those who want to cut the budget, they will find a rocky, rocky shore with a beach, and there will be dignity. And the second, to land on the sand, and an uncomfortable terrain, and you can close the project! hi
  23. KBR109
    KBR109 3 February 2016 16: 09
    +2
    Fighting Machine of Sea Showtellers or Budget Drinkers. good My personal assessment of this project.
  24. Reserve buildbat
    Reserve buildbat 3 February 2016 16: 47
    +2
    "With a weight of 30 tons 700 kg ... Machine length - 9 m, width - 3,4 m, height - 2,94 m, ground clearance - 450 mm."

    Sorry, but buoyancy is definitely enough with such dimensions and weight? Especially for overseas landing. And really, how will this unit crawl out onto an unequipped coast? I'm not an expert, but doubts run around ...
    1. common man
      common man 3 February 2016 21: 43
      0
      Quote: Stroibat stock
      "With a weight of 30 tons 700 kg ... Machine length - 9 m, width - 3,4 m, height - 2,94 m, ground clearance - 450 mm."

      9 * 3 * 2 = 54 cubic meters This is rude to a minimum. The mass of displaced water is 54 tons. With a weight of 30 tons, the buoyancy ability is guaranteed.
      Quote: ShadowCat
      I’m not catching up with something, but why is the current BMP-3 bad? Of course, the speed is not high, but there are cover ships this time,

      Quote: NIKNN
      it makes sense to try to increase the speed of the nodes preferably to 10-12, I think this is real, well, what else is specific to the application)

      CONSIDERING THAT HALF OF THE POWER GOES INTO THE KILVATER JET BY WATER, it is precisely to achieve a speed of 20 knots through the water that a powerful engine is needed. The GTE produces a higher power density compared to a diesel engine. Operating conditions when driving on water (uniform power without jerking) are acceptable for a gas turbine engine. In general, the engine on such an infantry fighting vehicle, as an afterburner turbine on a ship. And to carry out the "over-the-horizon landing" on the BMP-3? It takes 4 hours to get to the coast, this is some kind of masochism. And on land she does not need to "run" a lot. Her business is to seize the beachhead in the first wave. 10-15 km deep. Then others must act.
  25. Kadex
    Kadex 3 February 2016 18: 09
    -1
    The machine is needed, but we are late with it.
    Americans have EFV, Chinese have ZBD2000
  26. k_ply
    k_ply 3 February 2016 20: 07
    +1
    According to him, "when moving on water with a sea wave of up to 2 points and a wave height of 75 cm ...

    Spelled baLLov. What kind of article is this ?! Always and everywhere the requirement for stability and buoyancy of naval amphibious vehicles is 3 points [min.], Including BMP-3F. The Boomerang is on its way to replace the BTR-80 in the Marine Corps, and the American program for replacing the LVTP-7 MP with an 8x8 AFV (they put a "cross" on the EFV glider-BTR), which one is coming up with?
  27. k_ply
    k_ply 3 February 2016 21: 02
    +1
    Quote: stock buildbat
    "With a weight of 30 tons 700 kg ... Machine length - 9 m, width - 3,4 m, height - 2,94 m, ground clearance - 450 mm."

    Sorry, but buoyancy is definitely enough with such dimensions and weight? Especially for overseas landing. And really, how will this unit crawl out onto an unequipped coast? I'm not an expert, but doubts run around ...

    LVTP-7 (AAVP-7A1): 29t .; 8 x 3,3 x 3,25 (length-width-height) m.
    EFV (AAAV): 34-36t.; 10,7 x 3,7 x 3,3 m.
    Typically, BBMs retain buoyancy with a mass of up to 22-22,6 tons, but these monsters with their mass due to their dimensions, i.e. They retain buoyancy to a larger internal volume (ships, as an example, aren’t they?) until they overflow with a wave or receive a hole, for which purpose the roof and hermetic hatches (ramps).
    Quote: Spade
    30 tons, wheels and wet sand are not particularly combined.

    So, the density of wet surf sand is slightly higher than dry bulk.
  28. k_ply
    k_ply 4 February 2016 16: 00
    +2
    The amphibious landing operation (MAO) is a rather complicated operation and has little to do with the demonstration marines landing on Navy Day, and the demonstration USMC at LVTP-7. Only I.D.O.T.T. they plan to land on the coast with prepared defense in depth, but the landing itself will not take place with the superiority of the enemy in the air. Despite this, the USMC is betting on the concept of over-the-horizon landing, the basis of the waves (flights) of the landing and landing forces (ICE) are transport and landing helicopters, Osprey convertorplanes, displacement boats (LCVs of the LCAC type only with the 2nd and 3rd echelons ) Modern MDOs, except for interventional ones (Grenada, Somalia), are often planned to be carried out with the aim of diverting the enemy’s forces from the main land directions.
    It is worth enlightening, "isolating the landing area" means preventing the enemy or his reserves from approaching the given district, that is, when the 1st assault echelon is already on the coast, so that further it is not necessary to storm the defended coast, because the intensity of resistance, as well as the composition of the opposing formations, can be different. With a relatively calm landing, it is possible to regroup, organize the defense of the bridgehead and further offensive. Operations to isolate the BD region are carried out mainly by aviation and artillery (barrage fire), airborne and airborne assault forces (company tactical groups), or ground raid groups can be involved in order to capture key terrain areas in threatening directions. , both from the ground forces, airborne forces, special forces, operating from land and air, and from the marines themselves, operating from the sea in helicopters.
    The sea and air blockade is somewhat different, and also the ground block (cordon, checkpoints, patrols, engineering barriers, observation towers, etc.), because directly outside the framework of active (maneuverable) databases.