Military Review

Militant conversations about infantry fighting vehicles

91



The main role of the Infantry Fighting Vehicle (BMP) is to accompany the Main Combat Tanks (MBT) in the same battle formations, providing support and protection for their infantry mainly from enemy infantry with anti-tank weapons. The current BMP is largely based on the concept of an armored personnel carrier.

The forerunners of modern infantry fighting vehicles were the first combat carriers of the infantry, which were semi-tracked vehicles with an open top. For example, here you can call the machines of the famous family of the Second World War M14 Multiple Gun Motor Carriage produced by International Harvester, widely used by the American army. BMPs were designed for infantry mobility and equal OBT mobility and protection that unarmored trucks could not provide. Along with M14, another widespread semi-tracked vehicle was the German Army's BMP Hanomag Sd.Kfz.251, which also took part in World War II. As a rule, a medium-caliber machine gun was installed on these machines for self-defense and support of a portable infantry unit. Most of the 50's and 60's armored personnel carriers, such as the United Defense / BAE Systems family of M113s (still in service with many countries of the world), served mainly as “combat taxis” following the MBT. This vehicle transported an infantry unit under armor protection, which was dismounted for combat.

After the end of the war in May, 1945 and the creation of a new German army as an integral part of NATO, the armed forces continued to use their Panzergrenadiere concept (mechanized infantry), according to which infantry and armored vehicles operate and fight as one unit. As a result, this concept was implemented in the form of the Marder-1 BMP, which was developed by Rheinmetall and entered service with the German army in the 1971 year.

Project Marder-I set the basic parameters for the BMP. First, the gun (caliber 20 mm and more), capable of striking armored targets and installed the tower, which also housed the gunner, optoelectronics and fire control systems (FCS). The new German car also set a trend in the field of protection - at least from 12,7 caliber bullets. The car had a crew of up to three people and a troop compartment in the rear with 5-8 paratroopers. The Soviet plant in the city of Kurgan, which produced the BMP-1 in 1971 (most likely here is the merit of the CTZ, approx. Lane), developed the concept of the BMP further. The machine was installed 73-mm smoothbore gun with a low initial velocity of the projectile, ATGM, in the back of it was equipped with fire embrasures for infantry.

BMP Definition

Working closely with MBT defines an important characteristic of the BMP. These vehicles should have similar levels of protection, which may result in the mass of an infantry vehicle being able to approach the MBT mass. A prime example here is the heavily armored Israel Military Industries (IMI) Namer BMP, which weighs 60 tons. Wheeled BMPs can also be well protected, for example, the body of the Patria eight-wheel modular armored vehicle AMV (Armored Modular Vehicle) provides protection against 10 kg mines and a frontal arc protection against armor-piercing shells.

Other defensive measures may include passive protection against direct and indirect fire, debris and explosions on mines and improvised bombs. Separated protection systems, such as lattice screens and grids from rocket-propelled grenades, have proven effective against hand-held anti-tank weapons. The head of the direction of combat vehicles at BAE Systems, Mark Signorelli, says that the crew-oriented approach to survivability (advanced in its proposal to the US Army on ground combat vehicle GCV (Ground Combat Vehicle)) has excellent prospects, including (and not last but not least due to, for example, energy-absorbing seats, which reduce the level of injuries during a mine explosion.

The concept of reducing losses and damage also fits well with fire extinguishing and explosion suppression systems. Appearing in the 80's, they are now widely used. Systems of such companies Spetrex SAFE and German Kidde Deugra automatically turn on and extinguish the fire in less than 150 milliseconds. They protect the crew and reduce damage, thereby allowing the fight to continue. Other passive sensors warn the crew of the vehicle when it is irradiated with a radar or laser, allowing you to activate countermeasures in time.

Active countering systems can be simple. For example, in order to hide a machine in the visible spectrum from enemy fire, it is widely used to install a smoke screen, both with the help of smoke grenades and with the help of thermo-smoke equipment. Dynamic protection (DZ), it is in foreign terminology, active-reactive armor ERA (Explosive Reactive Armor) seems to be a more complex system, but manufacturers, such as Ensign-Bickford Aerospace and Defense, say that it is quite simple. Its unattended Breakwater and IronWall systems are reliable and secure. DZ blocks are installed on top of existing armor and explode, destroying the cumulative combat units, so popular in infantry anti-tank weapons and ATGM. Another approach in the field of remote sensing is implemented in the system of protection against RPGs using the air shell TRAPS (Tactical Rocket Propelled Grenade Airbag Protection System). The system, developed by Textron, incorporates a simple radar device and a system of modified mass-produced airbags, which is designed to disrupt the attack of a reactive grenade with minimal risk of injury to dismounted soldiers. Active protection systems (KAZ) of vehicles, meanwhile, detect an attacking projectile and intercept it in order to destroy or change the direction of flight. These complexes use radar to detect attacking projectiles and anti-shells (ammunition) to intercept them. One of the most famous is the KAZ Trophy from Rafael Advanced Defense Systems and Israel Aerospace Industries. Judging by the open press reports, this KAZ is very effective against ATGM and RPG. It was commissioned by the Israeli army and installed on the Merkava Mk 4 MBT in 2010.

The installation and integration of each of the above-mentioned systems affects the entire BMP, since a higher level of protection increases the mass of the vehicle. KAZ, by their nature, are more expensive systems, and DZ, in turn, may put personnel at risk. Even lightly spaced armor, such as an RPG grid, can have a negative impact and increase the width of the car, making it difficult to drive along narrow streets and driveways.

Militant conversations about infantry fighting vehicles

Tactical mobility

Tactical mobility is the second important characteristic of the BMP. Here the primary role is played by the suspension system, the specific power provided by the power unit (engine and transmission), and also the dimensions of the machine. BMPs were traditionally tracked platforms, but progress in the wheel suspension contributed to the emergence of six-wheel and eight-wheel-drive platforms. The advantages of wheeled armored vehicles lie in their ability to travel long distances and reduced maintenance. But on the other hand, a big disadvantage is their insufficient off-road maneuverability.

High power density (the ratio of engine power to the mass of the machine) provides greater acceleration, good dynamics and high maximum speed. The problem is that the greater the mass of the machine, the more power is needed and the larger the engine must be. Signorelli added that BAE Systems believes that it is necessary not to increase power without thinking, but rather to provide good engine cooling and efficient use of available power. The introduction of electric motors has many advantages in this regard. At BAE Systems, we were seriously engaged in hybrid engine technology (a combination of an internal combustion engine and an electric motor), since it has significant advantages, including 30 fuel savings of percent compared to traditional engines and greater energy efficiency to meet the increasing demands of on-board electronics.

The size and volume of the engine have a very large impact on the design of the BMP, the greater the volume of the BMP, the larger the area to be protected. This increases the overall weight of the machine. Thus, engine manufacturers focus on compact engines and drives. For example, MTU diesel engines of the 800 series are extremely compact with their power 800 HP.

Suspension determines the ability of a machine to use engine power to overcome rough terrain. It also provides smooth movement for the crew and assault forces and partial stabilization of weapons systems. Uneven surface, high speed and weight increase the impact on the car. For example, the AMV uses effective hydropneumatic shock absorbers, struts and dampers from the Hydrogas family from the Horstman Defense System. Computer technologies allow the sensors to “read” the suspension, measure and predict the operating forces and automatically adjust the suspension parameters in order to obtain optimal smoothness. BAE Systems has adopted and used active damping technology on its CV90 infantry fighting vehicle. Dan Lindell, project manager for CV90 at BAE Systems, said that in this case the machine is 40 percent faster, more mobile and more stable, which improves the accuracy of firing.

The eight-wheel BMP RG41 manufactured by Denel combines an advanced suspension and improved protection against mines. Five modular units, bolted under the case, protect the hydropneumatic suspension, which is connected to the wide wheels and the system of centralized tire pressure control, which provides good off-road maneuverability. The RG41 also has eleven energy-absorbing seats for the crew and landing force, it has an excellent payload capacity and 11 tons and an internal volume of 14,9 cube. meters


Fire power

The firepower of the BMP is determined by a complex system, including weapons, opto-electronic systems, SLA and weapon stabilization. At first, 20-mm or 25-mm guns were installed on the BMP, which were later replaced by 30-mm and 40-mm guns. This was necessary in order to fight the enhanced protection of enemy armored vehicles. The use of manned towers in the past was a common occurrence, but for BMPs this tendency also begins to change.

The German army chose the Rheinmetall 30mm MK30-2 / AMB gun for their new Puma infantry fighting vehicle. A cannon of this caliber allows you to have more ammunition on board compared to larger calibers. The cannon can fire an armor-piercing subcaliber and universal armor-piercing projectile with a KETF (Kinetic Energy-Timed Fuse) remote fuse with the possibility of air blasting, which reflects its main objectives. On the BM90 CVP, which is in service with the Swedish army, a 40-mm L70 gun from BAE Systems is installed. Ammunition of this caliber is used against armored vehicles, manpower, aviation and material part. Some armies prefer to have more shells in their vehicles, which is reflected in the export versions of the CV90 BMP with 30-mm or 35-mm guns, respectively, these are the CV90 / 30 and CV90 / 35 Mk.III variants.

Although manned towers remain widespread in infantry fighting vehicles, the proportion of remotely controlled combat modules (SDMs) is growing on vehicles of this category. In the Puma infantry fighting vehicle, the entire crew, commander, gunner and driver, is located inside the tower hull. Arms are controlled from the inside, the commander, the gunner-gunner rely entirely on video images and sensors. The machine has an independent stabilized periscope all-round view, controlled by the commander or the shooter. In addition, the shooter has a dependent day / night sight and a laser range finder. All videos, including videos from the five rear cameras, are displayed on crew members and airborne displays.

Regarding the advantages of the DBMS, the author of the article received a written statement from the Nexter company stating that “the DBMS does not require the same level of protection as for the crew. Consequently, with a smaller amount of metal, significant savings in mass and size are achieved, and since such systems do not penetrate into the hull, a large amount of space is saved, so more people and airborne equipment can be placed inside. However, some towers are still inhabited, for example, towers of reconnaissance vehicles. ” Ultimately, this is a combat mission issue.


Combat Ability

The concept of “combat capability” is difficult to define, despite the fact that this is one of the most important characteristics of BMP vehicles. It directly affects the combat effectiveness with which the BMP and its soldiers perform their tasks. It includes the accommodation of the crew and the landing force, accessibility to their workplaces and personal space; volume intended for weapons and life support components in the form of ammunition, water, food and batteries. The ability to conduct combat operations also includes communication between the crew and the landing force. The realities of combat are such that the simplest task can become difficult. Cold, extreme heat, fatigue, darkness, fear, anxiety and uncertainty - all this complicates the ability to coherently perform the necessary actions.

A key aspect of combat capability is situational awareness (there is an ingenious definition of this term, which I would like to give here - “The quality of the complex perception of heterogeneous information in a single spatial and temporal volume”, approx. Lane). OTO Melara’s engineers told the author that “digitization is the best solution for enhancing the operational capabilities of combat vehicles. It allows the integration of medium-caliber weapons, optoelectronics, communications equipment and operational management systems. " The ability to freely receive, distribute, view and act on the basis of information from several sources and sensors determines a decisive advantage. Dismissing with a good level of awareness of the environment and tactical situation allows the infantry unit to deploy effectively and maintain the pace of the attack.


Current programs

The activity in the field of BMPs today is divided either into the deployment of new machines, as is the case in Germany, France and Italy, or to the modernization of existing BMPs. In the second case, most of the effort is aimed at restoring the characteristics lost due to the increase in mass. For example, the mass of the American BMP of the M2 Bradley family, manufactured by BAE Systems, has grown from 25 tons to 34 tons, since these machines have gone through several upgrades over their entire life cycle. Another direction is the process of digitization associated with the rapid development in electronics and information technology.

When creating a new machine, Puma IFV, which began to enter the army in 2015, the German army directly used its Panzergrenadiere doctrine and developments on the BMP Marder-I. PSM Projekt System Management, a joint venture between KMW and Rheinmetall, will supply the 350 army of Puma machines for the 2020 year.


Nexter chose an eight-wheeled platform for its next-generation BMP. The VBCI machine (Véhicule Blindé de Combat d'Infanterie - an armored vehicle for infantry combat) entered service with the French army in 2008, in 2010, 630 VBCI platforms were ordered. In 2014, Nexter showed an improved version of the VBCI 32 ton mass with improved protection, a reduced turning radius 20 meters and additional internal volume for the landing. Deliveries of this option to the French army were to begin in 2015.



Italy has also chosen a wheeled platform - this is the Freccia machine manufactured by the Iveco / OTO Melara consortium. The Italian army ordered 253 vehicles in the 2005 year, and in 2010 the second batch of 381 vehicles was ordered in several variants, including the BMP, commander, mortar transporter and reconnaissance vehicle. Freccia has proven itself in operations in Lebanon and Afghanistan. It is in service with medium brigades, while its tracked "cousin" from Iveco / OTO Melara Dardo is armed with heavy brigades of the Italian army.

The first BMP-3 was released by the Russian company Kurganmashzavod in 1987. The machine has a weapon unit, consisting of 100-mm gun-launcher and 30-mm automatic gun. It is in service with the armies of seven countries; The last buyer was Indonesia, which received the 17 BMP-3F (model with improved amphibious qualities) in November 2010 of the year and 37 machines in January 2014 of the year. In May 2015, the Russian government placed a three-year contract for "hundreds" of cars. Ultimately, the BMP-3 should be replaced by the Kurgan-25 family of vehicles. For the first time, new cars were shown to the public at a military parade in May 2015. The development of tracked BMP 25 tons of tons completed, are undergoing its tests. It is not clear how many cars and when they go into service, although it was reported on the possible date 2018 year.

A total of 789 BMP FV510 Warrior and its variants for the British army, as well as 254 machines in the version of the Desert Warrior for the Kuwaiti army were manufactured. The British Army is currently upgrading its Warrior vehicles to extend their service life to 2025. Its WCSP (Warrior Capability Sustainment Program) consists of three subroutines: MPS (Modular Protection System), EEA (Enhanced Electronic Architecture) and WFLIP (Warrior Fightability Lethality Improvement Program - program to improve the combat qualities of the BMP Warrior). In accordance with the latest program on the 449 Warrior machines will be installed a tower from Lockheed Martin with a 40-mm cannon with telescopic ammunition developed by CTA International (a joint venture of Nexter and BAE Systems). The upgraded Warrior should be deployed in the 2018 year and is expected to remain in service until the 2040 year.

Modernization of the American Army’s M2 Bradley BMP includes an Engineering Change Proposal (ECP) program. The ECP program, coordinated by BAE Systems, began in the 2014 year and will run until the 2017 year. In the first stage (ECP-1), the emphasis is on improving protection and survivability with additional armor, improved suspension, installing anti-explosion seats and rearranging the internal volume. The ECP-2B routine is scheduled to start in 2016; here efforts will be focused on increasing the lethality, integration of new and improved sensors, including an advanced thermal imaging sight. And finally, there is a program for network integration and digitization. Under the ECP program, it will be improved over 2000 BMP M2A3 with the extension of their service life to 2020 year.

Meanwhile, Lt. Col. Scott Debolt of the Doctrine Development and Combat Training Command of the US Army reported that in June 2015 companies were given contracts worth 28 million each for research on advanced technologies that could be used in developing BMPs to General Dynamics and BAE Systems. . It is expected that the results of these studies on the initial phase of the program for the FFV (Future Fighting Vehicle) advanced combat vehicle will be presented in the 2016 year. As part of the FFV initiative, a new machine will eventually be developed, which will replace the M2 Bradley family. Over the next five years, "these companies and army laboratories will determine what can be achieved" regarding the project on the advanced BMP. At the beginning of this year, the chief of the General Staff of the American Army acknowledged that in past programs (first of all, the canceled program for the Ground Combat Vehicle ground combat vehicle) they tried to "create a perfect machine with too high requirements." The purpose of these conceptual studies is to eliminate the repetition of a similar situation and ensure achievable requirements.

Materials used:
www.armadainternational.com
www.baesystems.com
www.rafael.co.il
www.rheinmetall.com
www.wikipedia.org
en.wikipedia.org
91 comment
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. svp67
    svp67 16 May 2016 07: 05
    +10
    Well, in principle, this is a normal overview of the prospects of the BMP. But why did the author miss the Armata TBMP?
    1. potroshenko
      potroshenko 16 May 2016 15: 47
      +4
      It is also interesting how powerful the telescopic 40 mm ammunition is. It looks like they have a future in the west.
      The concept of TBTR type "Namer" has proven its effectiveness in battles, TBTR based on T-72 and the like can be produced in hundreds. But in the context of the BMP, what can oppose the Armata TBMP (or will the BMP-3M be opposed?) To the Western BMP with 40-mm telescopes and the Spike ATGM, plus the FCS and the latest generation target detection systems? Not in the sense of a 1v1 duel, but in terms of overall efficiency. Although a duel in a sphere vacuum can also be considered.
      1. cdrt
        cdrt 16 May 2016 16: 26
        0
        "Western BMP with 40-mm telescopes and ATGM" Spike "

        57mm high ballistics + Cornets + judging by the howl in the Western press, the most powerful KAZ today.
        Yes, missiles are worse than Spikes, but in direct visibility, an effective machine will be quite so-so.
        1. potroshenko
          potroshenko 16 May 2016 17: 54
          0
          Are you talking about "Afghanit"?
      2. Come on
        Come on 20 May 2016 17: 33
        +2
        Accuracy and mortality are phenomenal. In my opinion, judging by the excellent protection of CV9040 class machines and programmable BC, the machine is dangerous for a potential adversary.
      3. seos
        seos 5 November 2016 12: 50
        0
        Oppose their infantry fighting vehicles will be our tanks of which 20 units, at storage bases, are larger than their infantry fighting vehicles, therefore we are not going to change 000mm 30a2, because it is not designed to deal with modern infantry fighting vehicles (even with a promising subcaliber projectile) .
        A German 40 mm cannon pierces 150 mm / 60 at a range of 1000 m a standard target of NATO armor of medium hardness. The tank will not penetrate the forehead.
  2. Per se.
    Per se. 16 May 2016 07: 10
    +23
    The predecessors of modern infantry fighting vehicles were the first infantry fighting transporters, which were open-top half-tracked vehicles.
    Nevertheless, armored personnel carriers and infantry fighting vehicles have differences in their specialization, and for the first time the BMP, as a species, appeared in the USSR. The main difference from the armored personnel carrier can be considered the strengthening of the fire component, which actually made it possible to have both an armored vehicle and a light tank. Along with high maneuverability, the ability to cross water obstacles on the move, the Soviet BMP-1 turned out to be a fundamentally new universal infantry vehicle. The idea of ​​versatility was even more suitable for the Airborne Forces in the creation of BMD. The German "Marder" was developed together with the "Leopard" tank, appeared later, and was not so versatile. The Anglo-Saxons, with their "Bradley" and "Warrior", were generally late and also did not create anything outstanding in them. Today the BMP-3 and BMD-4M can be considered the best universal vehicles in the world. As for the concept of "heavy infantry fighting vehicles", it is useful to remember why the Israelis do not put powerful weapons on their heavy "Namer" - it is not the business of a car with infantry in its belly to climb forward or even next to tanks. Therefore, "Namer" is primarily an armored personnel carrier, and to try instead of a heavy armored personnel carrier to make a heavy infantry fighting vehicle, it is to lose the versatility of an infantry fighting vehicle, without gaining tank power and protection, and still risk a leisurely landing. If we talk about a tank base, then here it is much more reasonable to see the separation of the transport function and the combat function, which could be in a bunch of BMPT and heavy armored personnel carriers. What was born in the image of the T-15 is hardly reasonable purely for the army, it is a good "police tank", a vehicle for the National Guard, for special operations. Otherwise, the vehicle is weaker than the BMPT in terms of firepower and protection; in terms of transport functions, it had to be "shared" with an increase in the fire component, for all that, the versatility and maneuverability of the classic BMP was lost. To summarize, the army sees BMP (BMD) as floating, universal vehicles on a heavy base, BMPT with a heavy armored personnel carrier, and a "heavy" BMP, for special operations, like a "police tank". This, of course, is purely my speculation, which I do not impose on anyone.
    1. Alex_59
      Alex_59 16 May 2016 08: 39
      +3
      Quote: Per se.
      To summarize, the army sees BMPs (BMDs), like floating, universal vehicles

      Does Kurgan get it?
      1. Per se.
        Per se. 16 May 2016 09: 15
        +3
        Quote: Alex_59
        Does Kurgan get it?
        Perhaps, Alexey, I personally, however, like the BMP-3 more, a vehicle with great potential, unified with the BMD-4M, which, in turn, has become a "platform" for airborne forces. It is a pity that they will not start purchasing BMP-3F for the fleet, apparently, someone really needs to bother with the BMMP, instead of developing tank landing equipment for high-speed transfer. Neither the boat nor the BMP, so, will give birth to something to crawl along the landing beach, looking at the Yankees.
        1. kugelblitz
          kugelblitz 16 May 2016 09: 32
          +2
          For speedy delivery, it is better for marines to have SVPs, with a division similar to armored personnel carriers and infantry fighting vehicles, the first carries a lot, but is weaker armed, and the second will carry MLRS and 76-100 mm automatic guns for fire support. On land, this buoyancy is no longer relevant, i.e. should swim, but not turn because of this into a huge barge.
        2. the most important
          the most important 16 May 2016 23: 24
          +2
          Quote: Per se.
          I personally, however, like BMP-3 more,

          Me too! Of course, I would strengthen it in armor protection, put a grenade launcher on it, slightly reduce its height, install ATGMs in protected containers next to the tower and you can arrange duels from any overseas IFV. I believe that the era of armored personnel carriers has passed, troops should have wheeled and tracked infantry fighting vehicles, with appropriate protection and weapons.
  3. kugelblitz
    kugelblitz 16 May 2016 07: 21
    +7
    In our case, there is already a BMP-3 cannon block with wide capabilities and a 57 mm module from "Derivation" on the same base. There are platforms "Armata" and "Kurganets", and this is where the division takes place. In general, it seems to me that the T-15 with a 30 mm cannon does not make much sense; it, going in the same ranks with tanks, also needs firepower. But just a 100 mm cannon does not make sense, since there is a much more powerful 125 mm in the tanks going nearby. Just 57 mm will come in handy, but it's worth adding a rocket unit for sure.
    But the "Kurganets" version with the BMP-3 turret and the version with a 30 mm module is much better suited, the vehicle of the second line and the clearing of the territory, to suppress the firing points of the OFS and 30 mm cannon bursts. The vehicle is also well suited for the Marine Corps (with improvements in seaworthiness) due to its buoyancy and maneuverability, I would generally remove the armored personnel carriers from there, I learned too much negativity during the service, they are not suitable for the Marines because of their low buoyancy and weak firepower, but the BMP-3 equipped with a water cannon is just right.
    There is also a wheeled "Boomerang", but its sphere is more likely desert, steppes and other options for a relatively hard surface.

    At least I see the further development of our infantry fighting vehicles as such. wassat
    1. Volga Cossack
      Volga Cossack 16 May 2016 07: 37
      +2
      I also think that for the BMP-3f Marines the machine is just right .....
      1. avt
        avt 16 May 2016 08: 45
        +4
        Quote: Volga Cossack
        I also think that for the BMP-3f Marines the machine is just right .....

        request For the Indonesian .... during the time of General Makarov, the great war managed to not get into any war during the years of service, who had been promoted to the post of chief of the general staff, they called a three-ruble note and sold the Morpeh order ..... sad For good, they would now have BMD-4M and Shell ", unification with the Airborne Forces is an additional opportunity to throw in the VTA equipment, and the sea can throw up the equipment - the same tanks, again savings due to an increase in the order. By the way - Shell" they drove to the sea and even said that they drove in 5 points. But I have not heard confirmation from weight sources.
    2. The comment was deleted.
    3. Alex_59
      Alex_59 16 May 2016 08: 39
      +1
      Quote: kugelblitz
      . The car is also well suited for marine corps (with improvements in seaworthiness) due to buoyancy and patency, I would have removed the APCs from there, learned too much about them during the service, they are not suitable for marines due to their low buoyancy and low firepower, but BMP-3 equipped with a water cannon just right.

      I've also always thought - how will the marines on the APCs go to the swampy shore? Not all sandy beaches or pebbles. Here the caterpillars are needed, no wheels, even with pressure adjustment, do not help - I know from experience driving in Niva / UAZ through the Ural swampy thickets. BMP-3 - ideal for them, excellent seaworthiness, the ability to hammer with the main caliber from floating, water cannons, the center of mass at the rear. Why so far all BMP-3 have not been given to the marines - it’s not clear!
      1. kugelblitz
        kugelblitz 16 May 2016 09: 05
        +1
        The armored personnel carrier still has a moment, they regularly drown on a wave! For this, the Marines do not like them.
    4. avt
      avt 16 May 2016 08: 44
      +1
      Quote: kugelblitz
      . But just a 100 mm cannon does not make sense, since there is a much more powerful 125 mm for nearby tanks.

      laughing No, well, in a computer game - I clicked the mouse and the device will appear, that's how it is in life you always grab the promised device, but it's not there. But when, after a penny and a deuce, following the results of the battles in Afghanistan, they wrote TK for a three-ruble note with "Bakhcha", computer games, well, world of the same tanks, it just wasn't, and somehow the hundred did not bother anyone, as well as the Arabs practitioners in Yemen, and for some reason exactly “Bakhchu” was demanded for a Finnish armored personnel carrier, and not a beautiful
      Quote: kugelblitz
      . Just 57 mm and come in handy,

      to which, as it suddenly turns out,
      Quote: kugelblitz
      It’s worth adding a rocket block for sure.
      laughing By the way, for some reason, during the Soviet era, 57mm came to naught. Why would it suddenly? Not really, the "scoops" of happiness did not know their own.
      Quote: kugelblitz
      I would have generally removed the APCs from there, too much negativity

      But they generally go away in life, yielding to the MRAP the function of transporting infantry in conditions of increased mine and sabotage danger in general, and what is still classified as armored personnel carriers, in fact, is already mutating in the same MRAP in size and security. they are not alone in this opinion, I somehow think so too - the armored personnel carrier in the form of the Second World War is going into history and museums. Of course, the remainder of the old technology makes itself felt in the form of our BTR80 / 82 and usovskih "Strikers / Piranhas", well, as they say - do not disappear bor
      Quote: kugelblitz
      There is also a wheeled "Boomerang", but its sphere is more likely desert, steppes and other options for a relatively hard surface.

      wassat Yah !? The sinner’s right was directly frightened - it’s not that he fell into insanity and the water cannons on him have dreamed me in a dream !? Or were they glued cardboard to the parade? But it seems not -
      Weight - 20–25 tons

      Platform - wheeled, middle weight category.

      Speed ​​on the highway - more than 100 km / h;

      afloat - 12 km / h.

      Cruising on the highway - 800 km.
      Uhhhhhh! Lightly. laughing
      Quote: Volga Cossack
      I also think that for the BMP-3f Marines the machine is just right .....
      1. kugelblitz
        kugelblitz 16 May 2016 08: 59
        0
        Quote: avt
        No, well, in a computer game - he clicked the mouse and the device appears, that’s how you’ll always grab the promised device in life, but it’s not there.

        Well, I do not demand right now! BUT, Nafik T-15 30 mm module ?! wassat
        Quote: avt
        By the way, why in the days of the USSR 57mm came to naught.

        Terminator Schaub not to fence, Schaub bullet dushmanov with a high elevation angle, water all sorts of Cougars and Frechchi without spending 125 shells and even knock down helicopters in favorable conditions! wassat
        Quote: avt
        The scare of a sinner was directly frightened - not that he fell into insanity and the water cannons on him dreamed me in a dream !? Or were they glued cardboard to the parade?

        To crawl ashore with her weight only on rocky beaches is normal! And if the knots on the way snag? I mean swampy or deep sand? Over there, the Americans had plenty of slip on the Gishpan shores! wassat
        1. Lopatov
          Lopatov 16 May 2016 09: 16
          +2
          Quote: kugelblitz
          BUT, Nafik T-15 30 mm module ?!

          Do you propose to remake the T-15 into a clean APC without weapons? 30 mm module is the maximum possible.
          If you try to put even a 57-mm gun, then this can be done at the cost of an absolutely children's BC, literally for a couple of targets. Or cuts and so not a big landing.
          1. kugelblitz
            kugelblitz 16 May 2016 09: 28
            0
            Quote: Spade
            Do you propose to remake the T-15 into a clean APC without weapons?

            I propose to make an BMPT with an assault force, for attack aircraft (no irony). The car of the first line, with "shovel cuttings to throw hordes at machine guns" no one will. Protection and firepower.
            In the second line, there is no longer any need for protection against BOPS, but the tanks have already gone ahead, here just the capacity is needed - 30 mm to Kurganets and Boomerang just right. And the Marines, at the time, essentially took away the PT-76, so it’s desirable to have a modification with a module from the BMP-3 on the basis of Kurganets, not as a BMP, but rather as a light floating tank rather.
            1. Lopatov
              Lopatov 16 May 2016 09: 46
              0
              Quote: kugelblitz
              I propose to make an BMPT with an assault force, for attack aircraft (no irony). The car of the first line, with "shovel cuttings to throw hordes at machine guns" no one will. Protection and firepower.

              That is, the T-15
              1. kugelblitz
                kugelblitz 16 May 2016 09: 49
                +1
                Those. Yes, but not as a BMP, but I’ll clarify it precisely as a BMPT.
                1. Lopatov
                  Lopatov 16 May 2016 10: 33
                  +2
                  Quote: kugelblitz
                  not as BMP, but I will clarify - just like BMPT.

                  And what are the fundamental differences between them?

                  Well, except for the fact that BMPTs of the "terminator" type are sheer stupidity. A machine that had to be in two different places at the same time to perform its functions.
                  1. kugelblitz
                    kugelblitz 16 May 2016 14: 03
                    0
                    Well, nevertheless, for such an appointment, 57 mm would be normal to knock out machine-gun and RPG nests. Even OFS will do. Fighting lightly armored vehicles will not hurt, and more. Ammunition, if desired, can be increased in the feed niche or by reloading from the inside. But the advantage of 57 mm over 30 mm can not be taken with you. Although I think BMPT I need to put a 76 mm machine! wassat
                    1. yehat
                      yehat 18 May 2016 11: 56
                      +1
                      at the time, the t34 was tested with 2 guns - 76mm and 57mm
                      and despite the fact that the 57mm gun was much more effective against tanks, they chose 76mm, and all because there are many other goals against which it is needed.
                      the same thing here - the 57 mm gun, with all its effectiveness, is not universal enough.
        2. avt
          avt 16 May 2016 09: 43
          +1
          Quote: kugelblitz
          BUT, Nafik T-15 30 mm module ?!

          request And heg knows him, I don’t taste. It is necessary to look at the layout, I would stick "Bakhchu", as on the Chelyabinsk 782, but will there be room for the infantry?
          Quote: Spade
          Or cuts and so not a big landing.

          That's real - circumcision then do not have to do?
          Quote: kugelblitz
          Terminator Schaub

          This is generally stillborn offspring.
          Quote: kugelblitz
          Terminator Schaub not to fence, Schaub bullet dushmanov with a high elevation angle, water all sorts of Cougars and Frechchi without spending 125 shells and even knock down helicopters in favorable conditions!

          Do not remind the elevation angle of "Bakhchi"? And at the same time about ATGM for armored vehicles in it. But you can tell fairy tales how from a queue of 57mm "Abrams" will crumble into components, well, a crying crew will run away from it. But then 57mm is not needed, the real craftsmen of it are already their DShK in tatters ... laughing
          Quote: kugelblitz
          To crawl ashore with her weight only on rocky beaches is normal! And if the knots on the way snag? I mean swampy or deep sand? Over there, the Americans had plenty of slip on the Gishpan shores!

          If for the Marines, well, then I actually
          Quote: avt
          For good, they would now have BMD-4M and Shell, unification with the Airborne Forces - an additional opportunity to throw VTA equipment,

          And "Boomerang" in our conditions is obliged to swim in life.
          1. kugelblitz
            kugelblitz 16 May 2016 09: 54
            +3
            Quote: avt
            And heg knows him, I don’t taste. It is necessary to look at the layout, I would stick "Bakhchu", as on the Chelyabinsk 782, but will there be room for the infantry?

            With derivation remains.



            Quote: avt
            Do you recall the elevation angle "Bakhchi"?

            I don’t remember from memory, but over time, Kurganets will still supplant the BMP-3. Only now the place takes a lot inside.

            1. Lopatov
              Lopatov 16 May 2016 10: 19
              +1
              Quote: kugelblitz
              With derivation remains.

              With an ammunition load of 80 rounds for an automatic gun and 1000 rounds for a coaxial machine gun?
              1. kugelblitz
                kugelblitz 16 May 2016 10: 23
                0
                All is not lost, with a shift in the fighting compartment, you can raise it.

                Z.Y. Hmm, I didn’t immediately think, but what prevents it from recharging from the inside? Distribute the ammunition load in the fighting compartment! wassat
                1. Lopatov
                  Lopatov 16 May 2016 10: 41
                  0
                  Quote: kugelblitz
                  All is not lost, with a shift in the fighting compartment, you can raise it.

                  Reducing the number of foot soldiers transported?


                  Quote: kugelblitz
                  Z.Y. Hmm, I didn’t immediately think, but what prevents it from recharging from the inside? Distribute the ammunition load in the fighting compartment!

                  Again, reducing the number of foot soldiers transported. And so inadequate. And having canceled the decision in principle to prevent the placement of BC in the inhabited compartment.

                  On the "Derivation" it was not for nothing that two boxes were hung at the stern, even an infantry extra. BC was taken out of the "landing" for safety.
                  1. kugelblitz
                    kugelblitz 16 May 2016 13: 53
                    0
                    Quote: Spade
                    On the "Derivation" it was not for nothing that two boxes were hung at the stern, even an infantry extra. BC was taken out of the "landing" for safety.


                    In principle, the issue is solved, but BMPT should have a caliber more powerful ... IMHO wassat
                    1. yehat
                      yehat 18 May 2016 12: 58
                      0
                      the main thing is not to overdo it
                2. Grandfather Eugene
                  Grandfather Eugene 19 May 2016 17: 47
                  0
                  Quote: kugelblitz
                  Z.Y. Hmm, I didn’t immediately think, but what prevents it from recharging from the inside? Distribute the ammunition load in the fighting compartment! wassat

                  ... Enough space in the car, throw an awning on the floor under your feet, with a damper, to the maximum of ammunition, leave space for convenient dismounting. Everything is better.
            2. cast iron
              cast iron 16 May 2016 19: 44
              0
              Kurgan will not crowd out. Mobile forces need a relatively COMPACT and LIGHT infantry fighting vehicle for airborne transport. Kurgan does not pull by these parameters. Pulls BMD4M and with a stretch of BMP3
              1. kugelblitz
                kugelblitz 16 May 2016 20: 32
                0
                BMD is already a specialized machine for the Airborne Forces, we are not talking about it.
      2. Lopatov
        Lopatov 16 May 2016 09: 30
        +1
        Quote: avt
        But they actually go away in life, giving way to the MCIS functions of transporting infantry in conditions of increased mine and generally sabotage danger, and the fact that at this time they classify as armored personnel carriers, in fact, it is already mutating into the same MCI

        This is not quite true. Take for example the Americans.

        MRAP-like light vehicles, the competition for which is currently undergoing a stage of lawsuits, are intended solely to replace the Humvee in terms of light units. "Humvee" intelligence and other similar ones, on the contrary, plan to replace with lighter machines.

        "Strikers" are gradually drifting into the area of ​​"wheeled infantry fighting vehicles". With the increase in their firepower. 30mm combat modules for them are on the way, money was allocated at the end of spring last year.

        “Bradley” remain in place. With the closure of the FCS program, there is no promising replacement car.
        1. avt
          avt 16 May 2016 09: 49
          0
          Quote: Spade
          "Strikers" are gradually drifting into the area of ​​"wheeled infantry fighting vehicles". With the increase in their firepower. 30mm combat modules for them are on the way, money was allocated at the end of spring last year.

          What I sincerely wish for the US is - more of these wheeled infantry fighting vehicles "airsoft wassat and let it continue to drift, it’s better for us.
          Quote: Spade
          With the closure of the FCS program, there is no promising replacement machine.

          Well, okay, so let the Israeli "Namer" roll and throw away. I'll just be so glad.
          1. Lopatov
            Lopatov 16 May 2016 10: 24
            0
            Quote: avt
            Well, okay, so let the Israeli "Namer" roll and throw away. I'll just be so glad.

            And what has he got to do with it? The Americans are producing parts and assemblies of the Namers at the expense of American military aid to Israel. Naturally, they are trying to push the car into their army.

            But it is not a fact that, like Deripaska with his "Tiger", they will succeed. They don't need TBTR, they need BMP. Which will be, at least in terms of firepower, at the level of Bradley, which has shown itself perfectly in Iraq. These vehicles had far more Saddam tanks on their account than the Abrams.
    5. Come on
      Come on 20 May 2016 17: 50
      0
      The 57mm problem is the lack of programmable shells. When they appear, then it will make sense to introduce such an instrument. But then again, the BC value of 57mm will be less than that of 30-40mm, but whether 57mm will be more effective, in my opinion, is a big question.
  4. ICT
    ICT 16 May 2016 08: 51
    +1
    Quote: Alex_59
    and how will the marines on the APCs go to the swampy shore?


    on the seas usually

    Quote: Alex_59
    sandy beaches or pebbles


    , and when crossing rivers it’s just a fact, they won’t even leave for the cattle ford.


    Quote: Alex_59
    still all BMP-3


    probably still not enough seaworthiness
    1. kugelblitz
      kugelblitz 16 May 2016 09: 01
      +1
      And do not say! wassat

    2. Yak-3P
      Yak-3P 16 May 2016 09: 30
      +1
      that is not .. and there are enough swamps on the coasts of the sea .. let's say ... yes and the floodplains of the rivers ..
      1. Alex_59
        Alex_59 16 May 2016 09: 48
        +2
        Quote: TIT
        Quote: Alex_59
        and how will the marines on the APCs go to the swampy shore?

        on the seas usually

        Quote: Alex_59
        sandy beaches or pebbles

        , and when crossing rivers it’s just a fact, they won’t even leave for the cattle ford.

        No, well, let's say the sea coast and not swampy - not so expressed, of course. Meant muddy - viscous. This is in bulk. In any case, the caterpillar provides better traction and lower specific pressure. And it is very useful on the edge of the water.
  5. Yak-3P
    Yak-3P 16 May 2016 09: 26
    +4
    with the current development of the anti-tank system, and there are many of them, only the complex of all defenses against defeat (Kaz.z. lattice) of the infantry will be saved on the march and not to forget the engineering passage in front of the convoy. Well, on the battlefield in the classics, the infantry is invulnerable still on its feet ... I saw an armored personnel carrier with the 8th !!! hits in 95th 131mtsb - he came from the City himself .. he took the people out .. and the t72 burned all the way, but the fuel oil was live, the current was shell-shocked and transferred to another one ... they finally couldn’t think that it had arrived .. so how lucky in principle ..
  6. yehat
    yehat 16 May 2016 09: 26
    +2
    what a huge unit Israeli bmpt fellow
    I can’t even believe that the tank is made on the basis of
    1. voyaka uh
      voyaka uh 16 May 2016 10: 09
      +3
      All the same, they bring it to us with TBTR, not BMP.
      According to our tactics, he does not fight (machine gun - shoot back
      in case of attack), but only for the safe transport and unloading
      infantry.
      Although now, after the installation of KAZs on Markava and Namer, more and more
      shift - "to fight on tracks". Maybe they'll install a cannon on Namer.
      1. ibirus
        ibirus 16 May 2016 14: 16
        0
        And he will become a kind of tank in terms of mass and weapons.
      2. yehat
        yehat 16 May 2016 15: 51
        0
        But how do you plan to transport infantry at such a monstrous cost per unit?
        instead of 1 number you can do 120 bmp-2
    2. cth; fyn
      cth; fyn 16 May 2016 12: 13
      0
      Especially not to believe that on the basis of a small t-55, which is not very impressive in size.
      1. voyaka uh
        voyaka uh 16 May 2016 12: 19
        +3
        The first TBTR was made on the basis of the T-55: Ahzarit.
        And in the picture in the article Namer - based on Merkava.
        1. apro
          apro 16 May 2016 12: 34
          0
          Akhzarit is a worthwhile thing, the only car of the Jews worth looking at, heavy armored personnel carriers can be riveted from the t72't55 chassis, the infantry fighting vehicles of the light type have all already fled with saturation of the ATGM and the combat value of perfect RPGs is close to zero.
          1. yehat
            yehat 16 May 2016 17: 29
            0
            Do not tell me, BMP transports both infantry and some weapons / equipment, while
            provides some, but protection.
            the nude guerrilla with Kalash can do little harm from the bushes.
            the scale of the division is a very useful property.
          2. Come on
            Come on 21 May 2016 14: 27
            0
            BMP 1 and 2 ran off their own not because there were a lot of ATGMs, but because their 12.7 easily holes and even SVD in the ass where the tanks are. There is no need to talk about mine protection. And in order to "rivet" TBTR based on the T-55,72,80,90, you must at least have sufficiently effective passive armor to provide acceptable protection on the sides. In addition, it is not cheap as it would seem, because everything needs to be radically changed for this, the engine compartment must be swapped for example, a bunch of other measures, which may be more expensive than making a new car.
        2. yehat
          yehat 16 May 2016 17: 27
          0
          and what kind of springboard sticks out at the stern of Ahzarit?
          it looks like a roof over the entrance to the basement where potatoes are stored lol
          1. voyaka uh
            voyaka uh 16 May 2016 17: 58
            +1
            "looks like a roof over the entrance to the basement where potatoes are stored" ///

            Exactly.
            There is a door, but it’s low, and so that the soldier (when
            he straightens for joy at the exit)
            they didn’t catch the bullet right away, they came up with such a funny visor.
            1. cast iron
              cast iron 18 May 2016 19: 12
              0
              The visor was invented folding so that the awkward cellar roof did not stick out on the licked roof like an eyesore)))
  7. Verdun
    Verdun 16 May 2016 11: 02
    +1
    Work in close conjunction with MBT determines an important characteristic of BMP. These vehicles should have similar levels of protection, which can lead to the fact that the mass of the vehicle for transporting infantry can approach the mass of MBT.
    Increasing armor on the BMP, increasing their size and weight to infinity, if only to save people inside the car - a rather strange approach. The main objective of the BMP is the delivery of infantry to the battle line, and not the support of tanks with fire. Yes, the infantry must accompany the tanks, but at the moment when the tanks enter into combat contact with the enemy, the infantry should be already outside. Its task is to identify and destroy light weapons threatening tanks, such as grenade launchers and bazookas, enemy soldiers with anti-tank grenades. To do this, while inside the BMP, is almost impossible. Thus, the need for heavy armor, which reduces the mobility of infantry fighting vehicles and makes it more expensive, is quite doubtful. I understand that for adherents of the ideas of humanism this sounds horrible - after all, soldiers can be killed. Yes, they can, because it is a war.
    1. Lopatov
      Lopatov 16 May 2016 11: 29
      +5
      You are not quite right in your conclusions.
      First, tanks begin firing long before the infantry dismounts. Given the presence in the BC of guided projectiles, practically from the turn of the attack.

      Secondly, infantry can only support tanks from the effective range of their small arms. And hurrying her before does not make sense.

      But the BMP can support tanks, too, almost from the line of transition to the attack. Guided weapons, with an effective range of fire from a 30-mm cannon - in full. For example, according to the Javelin launcher, the 30-mm cannon can work from 4000 meters. Do not destroy, so suppress. Not allowing to capture the target.
      1. yehat
        yehat 16 May 2016 17: 31
        0
        if there is no reliable shelter, you will run away from the fire of a 30mm gun.
    2. cast iron
      cast iron 18 May 2016 19: 14
      0
      Have you thought about protecting the BMP crew? Indeed, unlike the dismounting paratroopers, 3 people sit in this piece of iron and are an excellent target for anti-aircraft weapons.
  8. cosmos111
    cosmos111 16 May 2016 11: 40
    +2
    Quote: Verdun
    I understand that for adherents of the ideas of humanism this sounds horrible - after all, soldiers can be killed. Yes, they can, because it is a war.

    Quote: voyaka uh
    All the same, they bring it to us with TBTR, not BMP.

    Quote: voyaka uh
    Although now, after the installation of KAZs on Markava and Namer, more and more
    shift - "to fight on tracks". Maybe they'll install a cannon on Namer.


    So, it turns out that the Jews from Tzahal are ALL HUMANISTS, but WE ARE NOT?
    And if you die / burn in the BMP with a cardboard scolding, your rodstennik.

    Now the saturation of anti-tank systems in Syria is simply enormous. Shooting is conducted not only in armored vehicles, but also in manpower, carts with memory - 23-2.

    BSP-1,2,3, BMD 4M is enough for one minute of battle.

    One must be not humanists, but realists, a trained soldier costs hundreds of thousands of $ and if he is destined to die, but not through the fault of the BBM who has no armor.

    Only T-BMP with KAZ.

    ________________________________________________________________________________
    _____________________________
    4 May Syria 13 Division SSA - Tou on BMP YPG / SDF, sowing. Aleppo.

    16 SSA Division - Tou on Loyal 23 mm in Zahra.
    1. cosmos111
      cosmos111 16 May 2016 12: 01
      0
      Here's another infa .. who did not have time to "take their head out of the stove."

      Statistics of ATGM launches for the 2015 year: at least 800 missiles were launched, 85% of them TOW.
      Amazed about 300 units of armored vehicles of loyalists.
      The cost of one Tow rocket is about 60 thousand - the sponsors of the terrorists, invested in Tow alone under 50 million dollars for 2015 year.



      For May 2016 (before 10-th) on the loyals of 30 launches ATGM.
      1 - in northern Hama, 3 - in eastern Kalamun, 26 - various places in Aleppo.
      ___________________________________________________________________________
      Sultan Murad - TOW 2A SSA on 2 ig fighters (banned in Russia). (Hit on single targets, and when there will be real BMP / BMD).
    2. Verdun
      Verdun 16 May 2016 12: 07
      0
      I answer immediately and
      cosmos111 and shovels
      because the meaning of their objections is close.
      Now the saturation of anti-tank systems in Syria is simply huge
      So the fact of the matter is that anti-tank systems, that is, means designed to defeat tanks. BMP, even well-armored, is affected by such complexes without any problems. Moreover, if the landing is inside the car, it often dies along with it. But it is problematic to fire from anti-tank systems against soldiers distributed over the terrain.
      But the BMP can support tanks, too, almost from the turn of the attack.
      It can’t, because even with modern surveillance tools, visibility due to armor is limited, which seriously complicates the destruction of enemy infantry on rough terrain. It is this fact that makes it possible to successfully use hand grenade launchers against tanks. An attempt to solve this problem by minimizing losses can be considered the creation of the notorious Terminator based on the T-72. However, judging by what I was able to understand about this machine from the available information, the attempt was not very successful.
  9. cosmos111
    cosmos111 16 May 2016 12: 30
    0
    Quote: Verdun
    So the fact of the matter is that anti-tank systems, that is, means designed to defeat tanks. BMP, even well armored,

    So I posted that only T-BMP with KAZ, in the first line.
    1. Verdun
      Verdun 16 May 2016 12: 36
      0
      So I posted that only T-BMP with KAZ, in the first line.
      KAZ - this is not the thickness of the armor and does not have such a significant effect on the weight of the BMP. At the same time, it is worth paying attention to the fact that in the NATO countries, along with anti-tank missiles, conventional anti-tank shells are also actively developing. Against a caliber projectile, active defense is a weak helper. And the active defense is not able to change the flight path of a projectile fired from an RPG.
      1. cosmos111
        cosmos111 16 May 2016 16: 46
        0
        Quote: Verdun
        NATO, along with anti-tank missiles, is actively developing conventional anti-tank shells.


        Only NATO can be with NATO.
        Quote: Verdun
        And the active defense is not able to change the flight path of a projectile fired from an RPG.

        And that it will knock him down, that's all.
        If not then passive multilayer armor + DZ.

        As an example of the goal of TOW 2A, for February from the 1 to the 11 of February. (Only No. 17 Metis).
        _________________________________________________________________________

        1) 1 Feb Daraa. on a group of soldiers.
        2) 1 Feb Latakia. on the fortified point.
        3) 1 Feb N. Aleppo .in standing BMP. Hit.
        4) 1 Feb N. Aleppo. by truck with VK. hit.
        5) 2 Feb. N. Aleppo gj PE 23-2 "Shilka" hit.
        6) 2 Feb in Hardatnin, N. Aleppo. A standing BMP hit.
        7-8) 2 Feb in Rityan, N. Aleppo for standing bulldozers, both misses.
        9) 2 Feb at Rityan, N. Aleppo. on a standing bulldozer, hit.
        10) 2 Feb Zahra, N. Aleppo. at the firing point.
        11) 2 Feb in Duvair Zaytun, N. Aleppo. on a standing bulldozer. hit.
        12) 3 Feb N. Aleppo. slippers (although yelling loudly) slipped out of the corner of the wall on the cart with the 23-mm gun.
        13) 3 Feb Zahru, N. Aleppo. on a cart with an 23-mm gun, miss.
        14) 3 Feb Latakia. on a standing SUV, destruction.
        15) 3 Feb Sahel, Latakia. a group of soldiers on the roof of the building, hit.
        16) 3 Feb at Amiriah, S. Aleppo. by 130 mm gun. hit.
        17) 3 Feb. Latakia. ATGM "Metis" by a group of soldiers.
        18) 3 Feb in Atman, Daraa. by bulldozer. hit.
        19) 3 Feb in Atman, Daraa. on the tank (T62 / 55, poorly visible) hit.
        20) 4 Feb to Zahra, N. Aleppo. by bus. hit.
        21) 4 Feb Al Khor, Latakia. on a wheelbarrow with 14.5-mm. hit.
        22) 5 Feb N. Aleppo. bulldozer, destruction.
        23) 5 Feb Zalikiat Wed, N. Hama. on a moving car, destruction.
        24) 8 Feb Ofor, Gab Plain. according to the calculation of ATGM position on the roof.
        25) 8 Feb Say Bashoura, Latakia. on a group of soldiers.
        26) 8 Feb N. Aleppo. on the bunker.
        27) 9 Feb Zahra, N. Aleppo. on a group of soldiers.
        28) 9 Feb Al Mansoura, Gab Plain. on the bunker.
        29) 9 Feb to Zahra. N. Aleppo. standing jeep. destroyed.
        30) 9 Feb Zahra, N. Aleppo. on a standing truck.
        31) 9 Feb to Zahra, N. Aleppo. on a standing truck (tangent)
        32) 10 Feb in Mughayr. N. Hama. again on a standing truck.
        33) 10 Feb Latakia. on a group of soldiers.
        34) 11 Feb. (older Latakia) on a tent with soldiers.
        35) 11 Feb. on a standing BMP destroyed.
        ________________________________________________________________________________


        _________
        And you say:
        Quote: Verdun
        Thus, the need for heavy armor, which reduces the mobility of infantry fighting vehicles and makes it more expensive, is quite doubtful
        1. Verdun
          Verdun 16 May 2016 17: 12
          0
          Only NATO can be with NATO.
          Do you think that besides NATO you’re not using sub-caliber armor-piercing shells?
          And that it will knock him down, that's all.
          If not then passive multilayer armor + DZ.

          Can you imagine how much in this case a satisfactorily booked infantry fighting vehicle will weigh, calculated on the separation of the landing? As for KAZ, however perfect it may be, in conditions of high-intensity combat, its capabilities are very limited. Wherein
          It is obvious that the use of KAZ both on tanks and on infantry fighting vehicles virtually eliminates their close interaction with dismounted motorized riflemen, which, being in their right mind, are unlikely to climb under their own “shrapnel shield”. And this is such a significant drawback of KAZ that no real way to eliminate it is theoretically expected in the foreseeable future.
          1. cosmos111
            cosmos111 16 May 2016 18: 14
            0
            Quote: Verdun
            Do you think that besides NATO you’re not using sub-caliber armor-piercing shells?

            I posted: it is doubtful that it will come to conventional weapons.
            Everything will end at the stage of nuclear exchange.
            Quote: Verdun
            Can you imagine how much in this case a satisfactorily booked infantry fighting vehicle will weigh, calculated on the separation of the landing? As for KAZ, no matter how perfect it is, in conditions of high intensity combat, its capabilities are very limited

            Let's wait for the performance characteristics of the T-BMP on the Armata chassis and find out how much it weighs.
            VK of the enemy, the same is not dimensionless.

            I gave the numbers of the TOW launches, from the 1 to the 11 of February 2016, they don’t tell you anything.
            1. Verdun
              Verdun 16 May 2016 19: 11
              0
              I gave the numbers of the TOW launches, from the 1 to the 11 of February 2016, they don’t tell you anything.
              The wars in the Middle East look pretty strange. The single use of armored vehicles without serious support from artillery and aircraft is hardly justified. I don’t really understand what BMPs are doing in settlements on the line of contact. They have little chance of surviving in such a situation. As for all these film crews with TOU, filming commercials under the shouts of "Allah Akbar", then in a serious war they are easily carried out by several volleys of conventional artillery.
              1. voyaka uh
                voyaka uh 16 May 2016 20: 31
                +3
                "then in a serious war they are easily carried out by several volleys of conventional artillery" /////

                If! The position of the ATGM team is very difficult to detect. The shot is silent.
                Only a flash, like a sun bunny (I saw once). And they change their position.
                The difficulty is that artillery does not help much. Usually begin to peck
                the entire territory, approximately, from mortars, hoping to accidentally put shooters.
                1. Verdun
                  Verdun 16 May 2016 20: 58
                  0
                  If! The position of the ATGM team is very difficult to detect. The shot is silent.
                  About that and the conversation that if you sit in a tank (or BMP), it is difficult to detect them. We need experienced observers who constantly monitor the situation, and they should not be behind the armor. And about the noiseless ... About TOU or Spike I won’t say it, I didn’t hear it, but the RPG is quite noisy, it’s already laying ears
                  . Usually begin to peck
                  the entire territory, approximately, from mortars, hoping to accidentally put shooters.
                  It is clear that a non-point strike is inflicted. But, with the right interaction and established communication, artillery is quite capable of opening fire in a minute. And if with RPG you can still run far for this time, then with TOU - I doubt it.
                  1. voyaka uh
                    voyaka uh 17 May 2016 10: 36
                    0
                    "We need experienced observers who constantly monitor the situation,
                    and they should not be behind the armor "////

                    Everything is theory, unfortunately. And I was one of those "observers".
                    While you reach the mortar, ATGM and the trace has caught a cold.
                    Our lieutenant shot "in return" from what was at hand: Colt 0.5. The trunk is up, fanned out (the distance is great. ATGM is not an RPG). To scare away and drive away the Hezbollah-ists (or Amal-ists - Allah will disassemble them). There was no question of hits.
                2. cosmos111
                  cosmos111 16 May 2016 22: 18
                  0
                  Quote: voyaka uh
                  The shot is silent.
                  Only a flash, like a sun bunny (I saw once). And they change their position.

                  Here, a really thinking person. 100% agree.
                  Quote: Verdun
                  . We need experienced observers who constantly monitor the situation, and they should not be behind the armor. And about the noiseless ... About TOU or Spike I won’t say it, I didn’t hear it, but the RPG is quite noisy, it’s already laying ears


                  Your words, to reality, have nothing to do with.

                  Only assumptions and words are right. But it doesn’t work out right.
            2. cast iron
              cast iron 18 May 2016 19: 21
              0
              T-BMP "Armata" from the sides will be protected from the sides only from 30mm guns and partly from hand-held RPGs of not the greatest penetration. There are no miracles.
  10. Tektor
    Tektor 16 May 2016 12: 42
    +1
    I don’t know what can be discussed here, when it’s already obvious that only heavy infantry fighting vehicles, such as the T-15, can act in the same battle order with the BMPT version, so that every second fighter on board has his own responsibility tooltips of the combat control system and means of fire destruction to complete the task.
  11. kugelblitz
    kugelblitz 16 May 2016 14: 16
    +1
    I even dug up renderings of possible modifications on the network! wassat
    It is the missing modifications.

    A heavy infantry fighting vehicle with a 57 mm assault rifle, although in theory you can even give it the function of an anti-aircraft machine gun with guided ammunition in the manner of a 40 mm foreign assault, go for a walk like that! But not necessarily, the target designation system will have to hang a specific one.



    Crawler BMP is a light tank for the Marine Corps, side modules can be adapted to fit the rails to improve seaworthiness.

    1. The comment was deleted.
    2. Simpsonian
      Simpsonian 16 May 2016 21: 11
      0
      BMPT is here
      1. kugelblitz
        kugelblitz 18 May 2016 09: 08
        0
        It is too highly specialized and infantry can not be transported on it. The T-15 with a 57 mm cannon and firepower has at least comparable protection and more capacity.
    3. The comment was deleted.
    4. cast iron
      cast iron 18 May 2016 19: 26
      0
      Why is it all crazy about 40 and 57mm nedopushe? The real hitting range of these is not much better than the 30mm autocannons. By the size of the BC and the rate of fire, they are clearly drained. And in terms of power, they completely drain the same 100mm cannon on the Bakhche-U.
  12. max702
    max702 16 May 2016 15: 27
    +1
    TBMP should look like the T-15, its weapons are quite enough. and the BMPT is not the current parody, but the "Bakhcha-U" either with an unmanned turret or protected by tank armor and under the control of a gunner, and the commander controls and observes the battlefield through the "Epoch" module installed on top of the turret. That is, the crew has two independent firepower post, as well as sufficient firepower and versatility for almost any purpose on the battlefield. It is quite possible to install all this on the T-15 chassis (carrying capacity) to increase the BMPT ammunition of the type that is on the drawing. the front-mounted engine and the free troop compartment of the T-15 will allow this ..
    1. max702
      max702 16 May 2016 18: 23
      +1
      By the way, a rifle was rumored to have a programmable shell and sight for this ..http://tehnowar.ru/40506-stalnoy-dozhd-intellektualnyy-pricel-podskazhet-snaryad
      u-kogda-vzorvatsya.html
      which allows you to increase the effectiveness of a 30mm caliber at times ..
  13. korvin1976
    korvin1976 16 May 2016 15: 28
    +3
    The BMP concept is on a par with tanks, in fact it goes from 50-60g.
    At the moment, this concept is simply outdated in all respects.
    Just imagine an attack on the front, tanks and infantry fighting vehicles in one standing, while between them there is still infantry. In 50-60gg. it could still be imagined, now practically no. Weapons are developing, the concept of warfare is changing, where previously BMPs were probably enough to cover tanks from enemy infantry, since the means of remote destruction of tanks were not developed, now BMPs are already missing, more protected equipment is required here, the same BMPT.
    With the current level of development of remote destruction of tanks, the BMP will simply suffer from information "hunger". If you take a frontal tank attack, then you definitely need to use the BMPT.
    Consider the option of using tanks, not in the field, but in the city (although they often do not belong there), then in this option, it would be optimal to use a heavy infantry fighting vehicle, not as a means of supporting tanks, but as a means of delivering infantry to the place of combat the use of tanks. The task of the infantry in this case, the cleaning of buildings and structures along the flanks and rear of the tank. In this case, it is just as advisable to use the BMPT as an observer for the enemy, as well as to counter the enemy.
    BMP is still one of the most important component of the troops, but not as a vehicle for supporting tanks, but as a quick response vehicle. I think it’s obvious that in speed (not movement, but delivery) it is superior to tanks.
    The BMP is now essentially not just an Infantry Fighting Vehicle, this category can also include an armored personnel carrier, but is a Combat Infantry Support Vehicle. She not only acts as a "taxi", but is also designed to conduct active hostilities together with the infantry.
    The armored personnel carrier is for the most part a protected "taxi", and weapons are mostly required for self-defense, and not for active conduct of hostilities.
    1. potroshenko
      potroshenko 16 May 2016 16: 15
      +1
      Exactly! 5 points!
    2. The comment was deleted.
  14. AlexanderBrv
    AlexanderBrv 16 May 2016 16: 54
    +2
    In its development, the BMP should approach the MBT, differing from it with less powerful weapons and protection (for example, in side projections). In close cooperation with BMP BMT - ram with a powerful universal weapon, with the task of destroying the main, specially protected targets. An infantry fighting vehicle helps clear the way, possessing a whole set of fire weapons and armed infantry, which dismounts as necessary. Perhaps we will see a specialized tank with a landing (the idea of ​​the Israelis with Merkava, but at a more advanced level).
  15. sub307
    sub307 16 May 2016 18: 35
    +1
    Of course, it’s important - on what .... More importantly, how:
    1. The comment was deleted.
    2. The comment was deleted.
    3. sub307
      sub307 16 May 2016 18: 42
      +1
      And this is his car:
    4. Runx135
      Runx135 20 May 2016 20: 01
      0
      Everlasting memory! Nobody is forgotten, nothing is forgotten.
    5. Runx135
      Runx135 20 May 2016 20: 01
      0
      Everlasting memory! Nobody is forgotten, nothing is forgotten.
  16. Simpsonian
    Simpsonian 16 May 2016 21: 28
    0
    where did the author of this opus translate so "wonderfully"? confusing BMP with BMPT and those who should support whom with tanks?
  17. Simpsonian
    Simpsonian 16 May 2016 21: 37
    +2
    Quote: svp67
    Well, in principle, this is a normal overview of the prospects of the BMP. But why did the author miss the Armata TBMP?

    he also missed that they appeared almost simultaneously with the first tanks in the WWI, from which machine-gun or cannon weapons were simply removed
    The first armored personnel carriers (in the modern sense) were built by the British during World War I as a Mark IX transport tank based on the Mk I for transporting up to 50 infantrymen to the battlefield.
  18. yehat
    yehat 17 May 2016 14: 34
    0
    in my opinion, heavy bmp should be done according to the concept of merkava. To sacrifice something in T14 for the organization of the airborne squad. But there are big questions to the layout and concept. Despite the small experience of fighting in cities and other n.p. , our army has little experience in organizing excessive infantry protection