Military Review

Presented a new infantry fighting vehicle Rheinmetall Lynx (Germany)

85
14 June in the framework of the Paris exhibition of arms and military equipment Eurosatory 2016 an official presentation of the promising infantry fighting vehicle took place. The German company Rheinmetall AG for the first time publicly showed a sample of a new tracked BMP Lynx, which in the foreseeable future could go into mass production and be subject to export contracts.


The Lynx project (“Lynx”) was designed to meet modern requirements for armored vehicles designed to transport troops and support them with fire. Such requirements have determined the main features of the appearance of the new machine, the composition of the power plant, protection and weapon systems. As a result, it is claimed that a new advanced modular family of armored vehicles was created, which can be updated in accordance with the requirements of customers. Also, representatives of the developer company are confident that the new BMP Lynx, thanks to its characteristics, is able to work effectively on the battlefield both now and in the future.

In recent years, the joint efforts of a number of companies from several countries have shaped the overall look of a modern infantry fighting vehicle, actively used in all new projects. The new development of the company Rheinmetall was no exception, and also uses existing developments, and also is based on the basic ideas embodied in previous projects. As a result, the Lynx BMP has a number of features that make it look like some other technique of a similar purpose.



It should be noted that within the framework of the “Lynx” project, two variants of the machine have been developed to date, with some differences. Customers plan to offer BMP versions KF31 and KF41 (Kettenfahrzeug - "Tracked vehicle"). The differences between the two technical options are in the size and volume of the internal compartments. As a result, the first modification vehicle is capable of carrying up to six paratroopers with weaponswhile the larger one holds eight fighters. The Lynx armored version of the KF2016 was introduced at the Eurosatory 31 exhibition. A larger sample can probably be shown in one of the following salons.

The Rheinmetall Lynx project uses the traditional BMP architecture of the machine. The front part of the armored corps is given for placement of the engine and control compartment, the fighting compartment is placed behind them, and the stern for carrying troops is located in the stern. Such a layout of the new machine, like many other samples, is connected with the need to strengthen the crew’s protection, as well as with the optimal placement of the troop compartment.

Protection of a new combat vehicle must be provided by a variety of different means. The corps is proposed to be assembled from armor plates of various thickness, which helps protect the crew and internal units from firing from small arms and small-caliber artillery. In addition, Lynx is equipped with overhead booking modules. In case of defeat, the hull is also equipped with anti-shattering slab, protecting the crew and the landing force. Declared the possibility of using active protection systems of various types. Reservation of the car was created taking into account protection against explosive devices laid on the road, as well as with the use of additional tools that increase the strength of the roof. According to reports, the BMP protection complies with the 5 standard STANAG 4569.

The type of engine is not specified, however there is reason to believe that one of the existing high-performance diesel engines is used. According to the developer, the existing power plant provides a new BMP high mobility and maneuverability. Thus, the Lynx KF31 modification with a combat mass of more than 30 t is capable of climbing slopes of the 60 ° slope and moving with a heap to 30 °. There is a possibility of crossing the ditches up to 2,5 m wide and climbing to a wall about 1 m high. Water barriers up to 1,5 m depth are overcome by the ford. The possibility of swimming is not provided.



On the roof of the BMP Rheinmetall Lynx is proposed to mount a combat module of the Lance type, made in the form of a swinging turret with a set of necessary equipment and weapons. This module can carry an automatic gun caliber 30 or 35 mm (exhibition sample received 35-mm gun). There are actuator pointing drives and apparatus necessary for using projectiles with programmable detonation. Also, the tower is equipped with a twin machine gun and can carry a launcher for two compatible guided missiles. The Spike LR complex is currently being considered as a missile weapon.

It is alleged that the proposed weapons complex will allow a new infantry fighting vehicle to confidently attack and hit various types of targets at distances up to 3 km. Depending on the type of threat, the crew will be able to use a machine gun, an automatic cannon, or guided missiles. Thus, the BMP "Lynx" will be able to destroy a wide range of targets, from manpower to armored vehicles.

The combat module Lance is equipped with two sets of opto-electronic equipment used to search for targets and aiming weapons. These systems, which are controlled and used by the commander and the gunner-operator, have television and thermal imaging channels, allowing them to solve tasks in any weather conditions at any time of the day. A commanding panoramic sight also allows observation in a sector of width 360 ° without any dead zones. The crew’s work is facilitated to a certain extent by an automated fire control system capable of taking on some functions.

According to the developer, the existing sighting equipment and other equipment of the combat module allow the new armored vehicle to operate not only according to the Hunter-killer scheme, but also to use the Killer-killer principle. One of the main prerequisites for this is the possibility of simultaneous and independent observation and search for targets by the commander and the gunner.



The new project focuses not only on sighting equipment and weapons control systems, but also on other equipment used to monitor the situation. For the timely detection of an attack attempt by the enemy, the BMP Lynx carries a warning system for laser irradiation. In addition, in the foreseeable future, it is planned to introduce the ASLS (Acoustic Sniper Locating System) system, which is capable of analyzing noise and identifying enemy snipers. Some data collected by combat vehicle detection systems can be transferred to other infantry fighting vehicles or commanders using appropriate communications equipment.

Own crew of a new infantry fighting vehicle consists of three people. In front of the hull, on the left side, is placed the driver. The commander and gunner-operator must work in the fighting compartment, their places are placed in the tower. All crew members have their own hatches in the roof of the hull and tower. Thus, the commander can monitor the situation, leaning out of the hatch, which is considered an additional advantage by the developers of the project.

In the aft of the hull "Lynx" is located the troop compartment for the transport of fighters with weapons. Six (in the modification KF31) paratroopers should be placed in special "anti-mine" seats placed at the sides of the squad. Embarkation and disembarkation should be made through the stern ramp. Due to the requirements for enhancing the protection of the body does not have the means to fire from personal weapons. The Lynx modification with the designation KF41 has a longer troop compartment with eight places for the fighters.

The newest infantry fighting vehicle is intended for deliveries to third countries. It is noteworthy that the company-developer has already identified possible markets that are planned to be conquered with the help of a new project. During the presentation, the head of the department of Rheinmetall, responsible for the creation of ground equipment, Ben Hudson noted that the demonstrated prototype received camouflage color, characteristic of the Australian army. So were shown the main marketing objectives.



Contracts for the supply of BMP Rheinmetall Lynx has not yet been signed, but some potential customers have already expressed interest in this development. It is alleged that several European countries have already expressed a desire to hold talks on possible supplies. The list of potential buyers who initiated the discussion of a possible contract has not yet been clarified.

It should be noted that quite a lot of tracked infantry fighting vehicles and other similar armored vehicles based on the same principles, as well as meeting general modern requirements, are currently represented on the international market for weapons and equipment. Thus, the new development of the German industry can become the next representative of the already numerous class of technology, although it can become the subject of new export contracts.

As follows from the published data, the Lynx project used both generally accepted, well-tried solutions and new ideas. In addition, the machine is equipped with a significant number of new equipment for various purposes. Thus, it can have significant advantages over older competitors, which should affect export potential. However, for the time being it is not necessary to talk about supply contracts. The existence of the project was announced not so long ago, and the first demonstration of the full-scale prototype “Lynx” took place only a few days ago. If the new BMP and become the subject of supply contracts, it will happen a little later. Potential customers need time to fully explore the new proposal and negotiate with the manufacturer.


On the materials of the sites:
http://rheinmetall-defence.com/
http://defensenews.com/
http://upi.com/
http://defence-blog.com/
Author:
Photos used:
Rheinmetall-defence.com, Military-informant.com
85 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Kars
    Kars 16 June 2016 05: 51
    +16
    Could not sell the cougar will try to sell the lynx))
    1. cosmos111
      cosmos111 16 June 2016 06: 34
      +4
      Quote: Kars
      Could not sell the cougar will try to sell the lynx))


      What could not sell?
      AFV "PUMA" was created by the consortium Projekt System & Management GmbH (PSM), created by the German companies Krauss-Maffei Wegmann (KMW) and Rheinmetall Defense for the development and production of an infantry fighting vehicle.

      Now Rheinmetall, independently developed the Lynx AFV / "Lynx", the Bundeswehr does not need two BMPs. It means only export to third countries, the first contract will be with India.
      1. Kars
        Kars 16 June 2016 07: 21
        +6
        Quote: cosmos111
        It means only export to third countries, and the first contract will be with India.

        ))))) funny) maybe if the oil price jumps) what kind of emirates would they buy)
    2. Bayonet
      Bayonet 16 June 2016 07: 22
      +4
      Quote: Kars
      Could not sell the cougar will try to sell the lynx))

      Until 2020, the Bundeswehr will receive all Puma BMPs ordered from Rheinmetall and Krauss-Maffei (350 units), which will total a total of 4,3 billion euros.
    3. Forest
      Forest 16 June 2016 09: 44
      0
      Most likely, the buyers were scared off by the space price of Puma, so they decided to make a cheap version, ala T-72 from T-64.
    4. 13 warrior
      13 warrior 16 June 2016 20: 16
      +7
      Note to the author: "Lynx" is spelled in German "Luchs".
  2. The comment was deleted.
  3. Wild Hunt
    Wild Hunt 16 June 2016 06: 29
    +7
    Eurosatory 2016 2nd day hi
    1. Observer2014
      Observer2014 16 June 2016 14: 32
      +1
      You can talk about this BMP "Lynx" until you blue in the face. I'll sit in T15 "Barberry" I won't list what T15 can. Only against the background of T15 "Lynx" is a fashionable Persian cat.
      1. Come on
        Come on 16 June 2016 16: 24
        +7
        Quote: Observer2014
        And when I choose, I will sit in T15 "Barberry" I will not list what T15 can do. Only against the background of T15 "Lynx" is a fashionable Persian cat.


        The hunter-killer is not a fancy expression, but a vital feature on modern combat vehicles. This is nothing more than the speed of selection and destruction of targets. The combat module was apparently installed from the Puma, and this is a serious piece that has a full-fledged SLA at the Leo2 level and a high-precision cannon, capable of not only throwing shells at 3 km, but also hitting. What can "Barberry" you do not know, very few people know until the tests are completed, especially 2A72 raises questions, or rather its fastening without a stabilizing cage, which is not very good for long-range accuracy, but BM Cougars with a 30mm Mauser have been tested and put into service. There are also questions about optical-electronic systems and BIUS, with which the Germans are all right. Mine and ballistic protection at the level of the Puma and possibly equipping KAZ ADS-AMAP. In my opinion, not knowing anything about the T-15 or the T-14, which have not yet been tested, nor have they confirmed their declared performance characteristics, nor the platform, nor the weapons and protection systems, but in advance now extol them over the existing, tested samples, a little premature.
        1. Observer2014
          Observer2014 16 June 2016 16: 53
          +1
          Yes-well (2) DE
          In my opinion, not knowing anything about the T-15, nor about the T-14, which have not yet passed the tests, nor their declared performance characteristics have not confirmed,

          laughing most not funny? And "PUMA AND LYNX" without KAZ! Without ATGM! And of course they all went through the baptism of fire! laughing And our "t15 Barberry" is shown only at parades on May 9 laughing .Well, yes, the Bundeswehr has straight "armada of tanks" and heavy infantry fighting vehicles, which I almost forgot without shells with weakly enriched uranium only against the old Soviet technology of Germany's European brothers laughing
          And our KAZ "Afghanit" is a mere trifle for the German "formidable" (By Russian standards) from the strength of a tank division laughing
          1. Come on
            Come on 16 June 2016 17: 54
            +5
            Quote: Observer2014
            yourself not funny?


            It's funny when you read your fantasies.

            Quote: Observer2014
            And "PUMA AND LYNX" without KAZ! Without ATGM!


            Yah? Maybe a closer look at the photo, especially the first look? The only vehicles that did not receive temporary ATGMs are the first 20 Pumas for the Bundeswehr, but they will be retrofitted with Spaik LR ATGMs.

            Quote: Observer2014
            And of course they all went through the baptism of fire!


            No, they passed the tests, were accepted into service and put up on the sales market, in contrast to the T-15, which, except at the parade, nowhere, at any test site, did not appear. And there is no need to talk about "secrecy", so how it goes along the intersection and how the BM works at the same time could be shown, since they lit up at the parade.


            Quote: Observer2014
            Well, yes, the Bundeswehr has straight "armada of tanks" and heavy infantry fighting vehicles, which I almost forgot without shells with poorly enriched uranium only against the old Soviet technology of Germany's European brothers


            In the 90s there were still under 2200 Leo2, a couple of thousand Marders (about 1000 Marders are waiting for their training for spare parts, sale and scrap metal). Doubt about the ability of the FRG industry to scribble 1000 tanks in a short time? And it's not clear about shells, what shells are you talking about? Is this 30mm to MK 30-2 / ABM weak and can only be used against the "old Soviet technology of Germany's European brothers"? Or 20mm Marder? "The old Soviet technique of Eurobrothers" as I understand it is BMP 1 and 2? So not only will the "weak" 20mm of Marder's fluff blow them apart, but smaller callibres are a problem for them. Moreover, BMP 1 and 2 may be "Soviet technology", but these are the main BMPs of the Russian army (not Barberries and Kurgan), and BMP-3 holds only 30mm from 2A42 in the forehead, the KS no longer holds more modern guns. And there are no more than 500 of them in the army. But no matter how it was, the Germans use tungsten cores in their COPs and their penetration is no worse than that of mattress ones enriched with uranium.


            Quote: Observer2014
            And our KAZ "Afghanit" is a mere trifle for the German "formidable" (By Russian standards) from the strength of a tank division


            Has anyone seen KAZ Afganit in action? :)) AMAP-ADS has been seen in action, there are orders already on the market, Trophy and Iron Fist have been seen in the same way, even in the database. Everyone saw "Arena", "Drozd" and "Zaslon", but somehow no one saw "Afghanit", except for statements there is nothing. Since in your reality divisions of "Barbaris" with "Afganites" are already being cut through the ranges, why is there no aircraft of the 6th generation, or something like that? Maybe all the same, you will rest on what is in reality, and not on what remains to be achieved?
            1. Vlad.by
              Vlad.by 16 June 2016 21: 01
              0
              It’s strange, but why substitute BMP for the forehead? Ahead of the tanks go. BMP second tier. In defense, a disguised infantry fighting vehicle in the escarpment still needs to be detected.
              Arena, Thrush ... We saw. Well, Afghanite, of course, worse than where he was before Trophy ...
              Accuracy issues 2A72? Is the accuracy of a 30 mm projectile needed at such a distance? Three projectiles with a spread of 4-7 m are guaranteed to hook an attacking helicopter, even with a slight miss. And with "accuracy" just a little - and RIP
              And if necessary, slam strongly - for 3 km ATGM flies.
              With SLA, there may be an advantage, but ... The fight will show. It is not a fact that if a bullet or a fragment hits a forehead, that MSA will help with something. One wire will hook and ...
              1. Come on
                Come on 17 June 2016 00: 29
                +2
                If you believe the declared performance characteristics of "Afganita", then this is just very similar to the German KAZ ADS-AMAP. ADS-AMAP is not only radar and striking elements, it is a whole range of measures, from passive armor, coating, to radar, and so on. How can you talk about worse or better? When they demonstrate at least the ability to intercept RPGs, something can be said. There is a video of tests or a demonstration of interception from all known KAZ, Trophy was even seen in battle, there was nothing from Afganit so far. It must be compared with what is, what is tested and is in service, or the arms sales market, otherwise you can go so far.

                In terms of accuracy, a strange statement .. Accuracy in any callibre (except for strategic nuclear weapons, probably), if not the most important, then one of the most important qualities. Just the same helicopter to shoot down something for sure. Effective range of programmable Air-Burst-Munition (ABM) projectiles 3000m, COP 2000m. In the MK 30-2 / ABM, even the initial rate of fire of 700-800 rpm was reduced to 200 rpm, which led to accurate burst fire. 3 shells with a spread of several meters are unlikely to hook a Tiger-type combat helicopter with 6m2 from the muzzle, this includes everything, that is, you need to roughly hit a sheet of 1,5 by 3,5m, which is also moving. Puma has the support of such targets and their successful firing at distances up to 3 km, as it was decided on the BM "Epoch" and others like him should still be seen. Accuracy is even more important for programmable projectiles, specifically for combating ATGM calculations, here an ATGM with a semi-active laser guidance system is not a very effective tool.

                When there is a battle, it will be too late to watch. There are factory and army state tests for this. With this, both at KMW & Rheinmetall, and even more so at the military reception of the Bundeswehr, it is very strict, hardly anywhere else in general. It is the extensive trials that reveal all the weaknesses that eliminate. Germany is just a quality control and the pursuit of ideality and is famous, it does not matter, fridge-coolers, cars, machine tools, tanks, or something else. For this, and military equipment is doing serious.
                1. Observer2014
                  Observer2014 17 June 2016 14: 46
                  +1
                  Just one question ! If such a mother-dear Bundeswehr possesses "super technology". Why is he (the Bundeswehr) not like an army? Why don't they put Great Germany in ...? laughing And the Germans themselves laughing I will answer in your place. 50 tanks can push the autobahn even a meter down in a circle, and you can get the engine from the "leopard" in 15 minutes and put it in place. Only the advancing (in the complex) thousands of tanks (which even break through the leopard) into Any projection, one shot does not care. Or this hour, scroll through the video to us how modern Russian tanks will not be able to do this with Leo laughing
                  1. Come on
                    Come on 26 June 2016 18: 16
                    0
                    Quote: Observer2014
                    If such a mother-dear Bundeswehr possesses "super technology". Why is he (the Bundeswehr) not like an army? Why don't they put Great Germany in ...? And the Germans themselves


                    Firstly, where did you get the idea that the Bundeswehr is "no army"? After the end of the Cold War, the Bundeswehr housed 2400 Leo2, several thousand Marders, etc. But since there was no threat for the NATO countries after the fall of the Iron Curtain, all Western countries began to simply save on the defense industry. The Germans, in contrast to today's Russian jingoistic patriots, always whine and are happy only when they get the best. Therefore, the military-industrial complex is at the highest level.

                    Quote: Observer2014
                    I will answer in your place. 50 tanks can push the autobahn even a meter down in a circle, and you can get the engine from the "leopard" in 15 minutes and put it in place. Only the advancing (in the complex) thousands of tanks (which even break through the leopard) into Any projection, one shot does not care. Or this hour, scroll through the video to us how modern Russian tanks will not be able to do this with Leo


                    Are you talking about which tanks? About the T-72B3? And what will they pierce Leo2 in the forehead with? Go down from heaven, the armored vehicles of the Russian army is the T-72, of which some T-72B3, a couple of hundreds of T-90 and BMP1,2 and a couple of hundreds of BMP 3. This is reality. It is unclear what kind of video you are talking about, where supposedly Russian Leo2 tanks are punching in the forehead, what kind of cartoon is it?)) It still doesn’t even smell like armature in the army, and if they bring it to mind, if it passes the tests, then it’s still necessary to prove the declared characteristics.
                    1. seos
                      seos 27 November 2016 13: 11
                      0
                      We only have t-72 more than your leopards and BMP combined, than your cougars will break through tanks? Yes, the shells for small-caliber artillery are better for you, but the fact is that such shells are unnecessary to us because we have a lot of tanks for fire support, we can handle ATGMs, tanks, artillery and aviation with heavy equipment.
                      Your leopard 2’s forehead isn’t so invulnerable - it’s full of weakened zones, especially tank battle isn’t for you WOT where non-penetration does not damage the tank, getting both scrap and high-explosive land into the tank causes very serious damage, it is not necessary to break through the armor to disable the tank .
                      ATGM cornet pierces 1300-1400 mm of armor for reference ...
                    2. vnedra
                      vnedra 3 December 2016 20: 26
                      0
                      what are they to prove, eat sausages with beer, and rejoice that you are not a fascist, that the roots of daisies sniff
      2. Navigator Basov
        Navigator Basov 5 October 2016 00: 28
        0

        Well, at least Barberry is still only dragged into kamenty, and not into articles.
  4. Predator-74
    Predator-74 16 June 2016 06: 48
    0
    Designed for "B" -ha for export: fashionable "LED lights", futuristic appearance .... But the fact that it does not float indicates that it is not designed for use in the European theater of military operations, tk. there are no so many water barriers.
    1. Nix1986
      Nix1986 16 June 2016 06: 59
      +4
      These are not fashionable LED lights, but effective new technologies, what should there be an Ilyich lamp ?! And sailing - you want to protect the crew well - get a weight of more than 30 tons, so far only supercars have light and durable composite monocoques.
      1. xetai9977
        xetai9977 16 June 2016 11: 56
        +4
        German cars have always enjoyed well-deserved fame. This applies equally to cars and armored vehicles.
    2. Skubudu
      Skubudu 16 June 2016 12: 18
      +2
      Between being able to swim and heavy armor, I would choose heavy armor.
      1. Nix1986
        Nix1986 16 June 2016 12: 40
        +2
        Such a thought in the head of a soldier until he plopped down into the general's chair, and then the thought is already another "a soldier must steadfastly endure all the hardships and deprivation of service."
    3. Mik13
      Mik13 16 June 2016 14: 21
      +2
      Quote: Predator-74
      Designed for "B" -ha for export: fashionable "LED lights", futuristic appearance .... But what does not float indicates that it is not designed for use in the European theater of operationsbecause there are no so many water barriers.

      On the contrary, any army is expected to be used primarily at home, and the possibility of using it "away" is an option that may not be available.

      As for the ability to swim, this is just a characteristic feature of the German school. They even Wiesel (http://topwar.ru/1121-boevaya-desantnaya-mashina-vizel-i-vizel-2-wiesel.html) does not swim, although there is no protection as such compared to the subject .. .

      As far as I remember, only the BRM Luchs does not sink in the performance of the gloomy German genius. At the same time, BRM Fennek (http://topwar.ru/14251-fennek-multiplatforma-boevaya-razvedyvatelnaya-mashina.ht
      ml), which goes to replace him, also does not know how to swim.
  5. kugelblitz
    kugelblitz 16 June 2016 07: 15
    0
    Something suspiciously looks like the Marten, go and reworked it a lot, "toned, lowered, alloy wheels" and decided to make an export version, instead of probably the more expensive Puma. Well, the weight for me is monstrous, we have MBTs that weigh so much! wassat

    1. The comment was deleted.
    2. cosmos111
      cosmos111 16 June 2016 08: 59
      +1
      Quote: kugelblitz
      Something suspiciously looks like the Marten, go and reworked it a lot, "toned, underestimated, alloy wheels"

      60's development.

      And there is a newer one: in the late 1980s, the German company Thyssen Henschel (later included in Rheinmetall) proactively developed a new family of promising armored vehicles, called the TN-495.

      In 1992, the first prototype BMP was assembled and presented for testing.

      In addition to the BMP, the family is supposed to include anti-aircraft, anti-tank, sanitary-evacuation, command post, reconnaissance vehicles made on a common chassis, as well as a light tank with an 105-mm gun and armored personnel carrier.

      Specifications:
      Combat weight: 25 kg ("Kurganets 900")
      Crew (landing): 3 (7) people
      Body Length (with gun forward): 6750 mm
      Width: 2840 mm
      Height: 1870 ... 2830 mm
      Clearance: 400 mm

      TH-495 Rheinmetall BMP.
    3. cosmos111
      cosmos111 16 June 2016 09: 02
      +1
      TH-495 Rheinmetall BTR.

      Engine: V-shaped 10-cylinder diesel MTU-182-TE22
      Engine power: 600 l. with.
      Highway speed: 74 km / h
      Cruising on the highway: 500 km
      Suspension Type: Automatic ZF-LSG-1500
      1. kugelblitz
        kugelblitz 16 June 2016 09: 33
        0
        Outwardly, the distinction between Cougars and Lynx is evident in the protection of lateral projection. The first is clearly better with this. And so the chassis and capacity are the same, maybe even a transmission with an engine in the same way.

        1. cosmos111
          cosmos111 16 June 2016 10: 28
          0
          Quote: kugelblitz
          Outwardly, Cougars difference


          "Cougars" in Germany, there are different. lol

          The LCA-Puma was initiated by Diehl and the Krauss Maffei project was launched in 1983.
          The first prototype was made in the spring of the 1986 year, the armament of the tower: E4A1 tower (KUKA) 20 mm. Belgian Cockerill Tower 25mm Bofors Cannon 40mm. Leopard 1A5 tower 105 mm. Mortar Tower 120 mm autumn 1986 year.
          Prototypes with various engines 440 and 750 l / forces and transmissions, weighing from 25 to 38 tons.

          It was assumed that this would be a modular chassis for the installation of various weapons and equipment.

          P Anzer
          U NDER
          M inimalen
          A ufwand

          The Puma project was frozen only in 2002 year !!!!

          1. kugelblitz
            kugelblitz 16 June 2016 10: 42
            0
            I’m talking about the current, in general, the roots of Marder can be seen with a naked eye. bully

            I only had the assumption that they just sawed off a cheap version of Puma! wassat
            1. cosmos111
              cosmos111 16 June 2016 16: 15
              +1
              Quote: kugelblitz
              in general, the roots of Marder can be seen with a naked eye.


              And with an armed look it is clear that feed the TN-495 Rheinmetall. yes
        2. cosmos111
          cosmos111 16 June 2016 18: 00
          0
          Quote: kugelblitz
          Outwardly, the distinction between Cougars and Lynx is evident in the protection of lateral projection

          Rather, in the bow of the armored car ... especially VLD.
    4. Forest
      Forest 16 June 2016 09: 46
      +2
      But it is well protected, unlike all our floating ones, which make their way through with small arms.
      1. kugelblitz
        kugelblitz 16 June 2016 10: 05
        -1
        If we compare Marder and BMP-2, then they were relatively equally protected, 20 mm in each forehead.
        If the Lynx with Kurganets, then again the latter clearly has aluminum armor like the BMP-3, although it is not known exactly. Because it is relatively the same protected and also has good protection in the lateral projection. Hence the lower weight.
        As for swimming, the marines, for example, already need to. In general, as an adversary to Puma, I see precisely the T-15 in the first place. However, BMP-3 is also enough, or BOPSa, or ATGM Brass knuckles. In addition, the kit on the BMP-3 is already there.
        1. Come on
          Come on 16 June 2016 16: 41
          +3
          Quote: kugelblitz
          If we compare Marder and BMP-2, they were relatively equally protected


          Do not tell, between the defense of Marder and BMP 2 worlds, not in favor of the latter. In Afghanistan, the ancient Marder survived a blast on a powerful IED of several dozen KGs, 8 out of 9 fighters survived. Moreover, Marder threw it a few meters so that he stuck his nose into the ground, but the body withstood and did not burst at the seams, as is the case with BMP-2 from an ordinary mine, and everyone probably knows this. The ballistic protection of Marder is also at a high level, approximately like that of Leo1. The buoyancy of the armored personnel carrier / infantry fighting vehicle has helped little over the past 40 years of hostilities, or rather, in any way, but cardboard aluminum armor and the absence of mine protection have cost many lives. In my opinion, a more correct approach to BMP / BTR is primarily a high level of protection, and buoyancy, or rather crossing, bridges, etc. should create engineering troops, with which they do an excellent job.
          1. AllXVahhaB
            AllXVahhaB 16 June 2016 21: 16
            +2
            Quote: Yeah, well.
            In Afghanistan, the ancient Marder survived a blast on a powerful IED of several dozen KGs, 8 out of 9 fighters survived. At what Marder already threw several meters so that he stuck his nose into the ground, but the body withstood and did not burst at the seams

            In more detail about this case is possible? With links desirable. Very interested in what happened to the surviving soldiers ...
            1. Come on
              Come on 17 June 2016 00: 38
              +1
              Some people with disabilities, of course, most are traumatic, the driver seemed to die. It is necessary to rummage as it should. There is a documentary film and there this episode is described, as well as a bit blurry, but a specific photo of the body at an angle stuck into the ground flashes. But I can’t give a lot of references, I can just convey what ISAF survivors told me themselves.

              Ps By the way, enter "Marder Afganistan zerstört" into Google, and you will immediately see the photo of the car I wrote about above.

              Here is the link, 1 died, 5 were seriously injured, the rest escaped with fright and bruises.

              http://afghanistan.de/tag/marder-1a5/
              1. AllXVahhaB
                AllXVahhaB 17 June 2016 08: 51
                0
                Quote: Yeah, well.
                Ps By the way, enter "Marder Afganistan zerstört" into Google, and you will immediately see the photo of the car I wrote about above.

                Just two and no information. Judging by the photo, both the car and the crew are disabled and are not suitable for further service. So from a military point of view, it does not differ in any way from the BMP-2 "torn at the seams". Why am I asking about the further fate of the crew? Der Teufel steckt im Detail. You wrote: survived. How? If a person is paralyzed and lives from the apparatus that artificially supports his life (and judging by the photo of the car, this can be assumed), then for me it is better to die in battle than to exist as a vegetable! That is why I am interested in the further fate of the surviving soldiers ...
              2. AllXVahhaB
                AllXVahhaB 17 June 2016 08: 58
                +1
                Quote: Yeah, well.
                Here is the link, 1 died, 5 were seriously injured, the rest escaped with fright and bruises.

                //afghanistan.de/tag/marder-1a5/

                And where is there about "got off with bruises and fright"? There are only about 5 seriously wounded. But this concept is loose, and there may be a coma. So, what is next? What is the fate of the surviving soldiers? No information! It is likely that these five died in the hospital after a couple of hours or days ...
                1. Come on
                  Come on 26 June 2016 21: 01
                  0
                  Quote: AllXVahhaB
                  It is likely that these five died in the hospital after a couple of hours or days ...


                  I'm talking about a specific case, without "probably". 8 out of 9 crew members survived! 5 of them are wounded, of which 2 are seriously, but they live, three more escaped with a shell shock. That is, out of 9 crew members, one was killed on a land mine of several tens of kilograms of TNT, 5 were wounded, of which 2 were seriously. I saw an eyewitness interview about this case, a warrant officer of the Bundeswehr. And the land mine on which Marder was blown up will blow to shreds any Russian BMP (which are in service). This, both from a military and from any point of view, the difference is not in favor of the BMP, which is already carried by landmines, which Marder will swallow without any problems. Marder 1A5 is just optimized in terms of mine protection. There is also another combat experience with Marder, shelling from RPG7, the car was disabled, 4 soldiers suffered injuries of varying severity, but survived.
        2. Forest
          Forest 16 June 2016 18: 00
          -2
          Marder of the first versions held KPVT in the forehead, and this thresher is more powerful than the 20-mm Hispany, from which the BMP was protected. Yes, and they are protected at what distance - in our armor the 20-mm armor-piercing projectile should be kept at 200 m, and on the Marder - 20-mm BOPS with 10 m. Judging by the video about Kurganets - it is protected worse than the old BMPs - one tin instead of armor.
  6. Per se.
    Per se. 16 June 2016 07: 36
    +2
    The latest infantry fighting vehicle is intended for delivery to third countries.
    Yes, for Australia, that's the thing ... It seems that, in fact, the BMP should be just a universal machine, which is unthinkable without the ability to overcome water passages on the move. If we talk about a heavy version, so to speak, a tank base, it is more logical to have a separate heavy armored personnel carrier for transporting infantry and a separate BMPT for the specification of fire support. A heavy infantry fighting vehicle is flawed as a universal vehicle without the ability to swim, flawed as a transport due to the addition of reinforced weapons to the detriment of the landing force, flawed as fire support due to the need to carry troops, while maintaining transport functions to the detriment of the firing ones. The most important thing is to climb forward or next to tanks with an unhurried landing, this is the opportunity to lose the entire landing, since a heavy infantry fighting vehicle is also flawed in protection compared to a tank. The only place where a heavy infantry fighting vehicle is presented is for the police, as a "police tank" for special forces, to drive terrorists. In the photo, the "buckets" are impressive, with all the armor, with them, like, there is not enough marking, like, "carefully, glass" ...
    1. Come on
      Come on 16 June 2016 16: 47
      +5
      Did you have to swim a lot in Afghanistan, Chechnya, Ukraine, Syria? In my opinion, this is precisely what all the BMP1-3 flaws, low ballistic and mine protection costed many lives, but the ability to swim saved few people. Except for one episode from Grozny, where the crew allegedly was able to escape from the Chechens' fire through a reservoir, no other successes were heard.
      1. Per se.
        Per se. 17 June 2016 08: 09
        +6
        Quote: Yeah, well.
        Did you have to swim a lot in Afghanistan, Chechnya, Ukraine, Syria?
        Afghan, Chechnya, low-water and mountainous areas, the enemy is not a regular army, but militants using partisan tactics. Syria, DAISH (ISIS), are essentially the same mujahideen and "Czechs", the same dry region. Ukraine ..., so everything is ahead, you will have a "bath", you will have "coffee" ... There is no inferiority of the BMP-1/3, just as there is no inferiority of the BMD, but you can foolishly break a horseradish, and any , the thickest-skinned tanks to burn. There are not only episodes of Grozny, there is the experience of Budapest and Prague, or even Berlin, the battle in the city for any armored vehicles is daunting, and it’s not so much and not only in the thick armor of the newly minted “Mouse”. In any case, BMP is not a bomb shelter. This must be understood, and not taken out of context only what is convenient. Finally, if you read carefully, I didn't go to extremes, either / or, but versatility has its pros and cons, as does specialization. In one case, a highly maneuverable universal BMP (BMD) will be good, in the other a heavy armored personnel carrier with BMPT or, for a special operation, a heavy BMP. I personally doubt the benefit of the latter, but this is purely my opinion, nothing more.
        1. Come on
          Come on 17 June 2016 17: 08
          +1
          BMP 1 and 2 were made for a certain theater of operations, even more, for the war in Europe, with the participation of millions of soldiers and thousands of armored vehicles, taking into account the 2nd world war. Then tactics still implied specific lines of contact, and not, as now, theater operations are similar to a chessboard due to the fact that the speed of response and logistics has increased. Much less equipment is now required for the same tasks. Therefore, in asymmetric wars, the weaknesses of BMP1 and 2 were revealed, and BMP 3 was already designed taking into account Afgan, but still for the "big war". Buoyancy is needed for a very short period of time, to overcome a body of water, but the price for buoyancy is weak armor and this is unacceptable given the possible dangers of today and the future. Besides, the problem is this, okay BMP / armored personnel carriers swam across the reservoir, but what about tanks? For tanks, after all, you will still have to attract engineering troops, and without tanks, the survival rate of BMP alone will be very low. Modern engineering troops are able to build a pontoon bridge in a short time that can withstand heavy MBT. So why then buoyancy, if without tanks anywhere? I'm not saying that amphibious vehicles are not needed at all, reconnaissance vehicles, marines, yes, but why do land, motorized rifle formations need buoyancy? But by the way, there are, after all, solutions that imply both buoyancy and high protection with firepower, this is the K21 infantry fighting vehicle of the South Koreans. An interesting solution with inflatable balloons. You say you can shoot thick tanks too ... yes, of course you can. But one thing, when an armored personnel carrier can withstand everything, up to a small-caliber cannon up to 30mm, the problem is solved with protection against RPGs and other similar cumulative grenades, when it can withstand mines and IEDs up to 10kg (performance characteristics of Puma or Namer), that is, when the danger of defeat is minimized and another thing is when your convoy is shot from 12,7, flies and blown up by compact, and therefore less noticeable mines and IEDs. BMP1,2,3 is the past, this is best proved by new machines like Kurganets and T-15.
          1. Per se.
            Per se. 17 June 2016 18: 58
            +2
            Quote: Yeah, well.
            Buoyancy is needed for a very short period of time
            Everything is so, but, as they say in Russia, the road is a spoon for dinner. If you ever crossed a water obstacle with full force, you will remember this for the rest of your life. I don’t want to hit the lyrics, but the war veterans
            they knew the value of this "short period of time" well, - "Ferry, crossing, left bank, right bank. Rough snow, ice edge, to whom memory, to whom glory, to whom dark water" ... When crossing the same Dnieper in the Second World War, many of our men died, they would have died much less, if then at least a parody of the BMP-1. Crossings are being destroyed, now, with high-precision weapons, even aviation is not particularly needed for this, but the reservoir is full of rivulets and rivers, and for bridgeheads someone must be the first and right away. Yes, the design of Trishkin Kaftan armored vehicles, the strengthening of one weakens the other, for this it is necessary to clearly understand what Russia needs, and we need not only floating vehicles, but also airborne vehicles, here BMP-3 and BMD-4M, exactly what it is necessary. Naturally, not as a denial of heavy equipment, but as an addition to one another, according to your tasks.
    2. primers
      primers 16 June 2016 18: 53
      +3
      "... In the photo, the" buckets "are impressive, with all the armor, with them, like, there is not enough marking, like," be careful, glass "..."

      So I, too, look at these glasses on modern models of technology and think that a long burst from a machine gun or a concentration of fire from the defenders will disable this wunderwaffle. I recall the case of the storming of a hospital in Budenovsk like ... Its participant said that the attack with the participation of the BMP, starting immediately, experienced difficulties, since the dense fire of the bandits very quickly disabled the triplexes. And they are much smaller than these "aquariums"
      1. Come on
        Come on 17 June 2016 00: 48
        +2
        An infantry fighting vehicle is forced to approach at closer distances in order to conduct high-precision fire than Puma or this vehicle will have. In addition, if I’m not mistaken, the BTR-70 with the KPVT, and not the BMP-2, worked in the Budenovsk hospital. In such BMs as Puma and similar cars, optics are protected by interchangeable bulletproof glass. Even if one succeeds in breaking one, they will quickly replace it.
        1. corporal
          corporal 17 June 2016 02: 27
          0
          Quote: Yeah, well.
          replaceable bulletproof glass protect the optics.

          What about a thermal imager?
          1. Come on
            Come on 17 June 2016 04: 21
            +2
            Quote: Corporal
            What about a thermal imager?


            So all three optical channels in one sight, or rather the case. Day, night and infrared. And the same thing with the gunner, that is, a duplicate sight. But in my opinion, trying to get into the optics of modern machines equipped with all kinds of cameras and sensors, whether it is MRI or MBT is suicide for a sniper. And if the car is in motion, then it is impossible to hit optics precisely. Americans in the course of the Iraqi company created an anti-sniper system that in seconds determines the direction, distance and even the type of weapon (by a characteristic sound). By the way, one engineer developed it, the development cost is $ 30. With the help of microphones located around the perimeter of the machine, the direction is subtracted. The system is quite compact and not expensive and most likely it will probably be all in the near future, or a sufficient number of equipment will be equipped.
            1. corporal
              corporal 18 June 2016 03: 54
              0
              Quote: Yeah, well.
              night and infrared.

              what Is it not one horseradish channel?
              1. Come on
                Come on 18 June 2016 04: 57
                +2
                Of course not. Infrared is a thermal imager, you see only the difference in temperature, or in the light or dark range. A night vision channel is an enhancement of residual light, for example, from the moon, or, say, it is an opportunity to see like a cat (she does not see in the infrared range, but simply absorbs light from her eyes and reflects them on the viewing angle). A thermal imager needs a matrix, that is, a monitor is mandatory, night vision does not have this problem. The initial vision devices appeared during the 2MV, the first T-62 tank, which was equipped with such a sight. The infrared channel came much later.
                1. albanian
                  albanian 20 June 2016 02: 16
                  +1
                  You bring some strange comparisons, bmp2 is a car of a completely different application than what the West is doing now. The West rivets BMP for its own local conflicts, our BMP for a full-fledged war with the West, and not for the persecution of any terrorists. Another thing is that in the absence of more specialized machines, in "fashionable" military conflicts, we had to do what we had. The West will need to make 20-40 thousand BMPs, they will think about the appearance of this technique seven more times and it is far from the fact that it will be better than the current one.
                  And you can make another hundred with all sorts of whistles and fakes, write them in a separate anti-terrorist brigade, call them special equipment and let go of chasing those who did not like them.
                  But why ours did not use "special equipment", although not so few were designed and even put into service (the same BMT), the question is interesting.
                  1. Come on
                    Come on 26 June 2016 18: 06
                    0
                    Quote: Albanian
                    You bring some strange comparisons, BMP2 is a machine of a completely different application than what the West is doing now. The West rivets BMP for its own local conflicts, our BMP for a full-fledged war with the West, and not for the persecution of all kinds of terrorists.


                    I am comparing what is. And the BMP, judging by the "barberry Kurgan", does not suit the General Staff of the RF Ministry of Defense. The chances of a successful battle with motorized vehicles on BMP 1,2, and triplets against the enemy on such machines as CV90, Ajax, Puma, at least Marder is small, because of the archaic optical-electronic base and cardboard armor. All these "they make their BMPs to drive the Papuans, and we are for a full-scale war" is simply nonsense and it is not clear what these conclusions are based on.

                    Quote: Albanian
                    It will take the West to make 20-40 thousand infantry fighting vehicles, they will think seven more times about the appearance of this equipment and it is far from the fact that it will be better than the current one.


                    And in the West, didn’t they do BMP before? Do you know how many Marders alone you made? Only the Marders in the BMP are also perfectly armored, especially good against mines. Then you do not seem to be fully aware of the industrial power of Western countries. If necessary, they will rivet as many infantry fighting vehicles as necessary and of course modern and well-protected.
  7. fa2998
    fa2998 16 June 2016 07: 44
    +4
    Quote: Predator-74
    Designed "B" -ha for export

    "B-ha" is designed for SAFE delivery of l / s on more battle. Hence the weight (30 tons) and a rather modest (by our standards) weapon. A good BMP, no need to "tune" 57-100 mm on such a machine. a gun (and even in a double and 30 mm.) and a solid ammunition. This "steals" volumes and a solid load. And by tradition, the landing party will ride on a "cardboard" BMP. Our modern combat modules weigh about 4000 kg from 12 15 tons of total weight. THIRD !! We are talking about the Infantry Combat Vehicle. So its first function is to SAFEly deliver this infantry. And there are plenty of fire resources in the army, tanks, self-propelled guns and other self-propelled launchers, if that will support. yes hi
    1. Gray brother
      Gray brother 16 June 2016 09: 21
      0
      Quote: fa2998
      Good infantry fighting vehicle

      She's not even wheeled - fu fu fu.
    2. Art
      Art 16 June 2016 21: 35
      +2
      And you do not confuse the concept with an armored personnel carrier? all the same, the transport of armored personnel carriers to the battlefield, and behind the BMP, in addition to delivering to the battlefield, infantry support by fire.
  8. Cruorvult
    Cruorvult 16 June 2016 08: 07
    +2
    Quote: fa2998
    Quote: Predator-74
    Designed "B" -ha for export

    "B-ha" is designed for SAFE delivery of l / s on more battle. Hence the weight (30 tons) and a rather modest (by our standards) weapon. A good BMP, no need to "tune" 57-100 mm on such a machine. a gun (and even in a double and 30 mm.) and a solid ammunition. This "steals" volumes and a solid load. And by tradition, the landing party will ride on a "cardboard" BMP. Our modern combat modules weigh about 4000 kg from 12 15 tons of total weight. THIRD !! We are talking about the Infantry Combat Vehicle. So its first function is to SAFEly deliver this infantry. And there are plenty of fire resources in the army, tanks, self-propelled guns and other self-propelled launchers, if that will support. yes hi

    It safely delivers infantry armored personnel carriers, and in the rear, an infantry fighting vehicle is an infantry fighting vehicle that supports it with fire, have 30 tons of weight and a 35mm bullet and not even have an anti-tank missile system. Domestic 100/30 modules are also an unfortunate concept, since 100 mm is not enough to destroy a tank, and 30 mm is not enough to guarantee the destruction of modern armored personnel carriers / infantry fighting vehicles, as well as a small explosive action.
    1. kugelblitz
      kugelblitz 16 June 2016 08: 26
      0
      Quote: CruorVult
      Domestic 100/30 modules are also an unsuccessful concept, since 100 mm is not enough to destroy a tank, and 30 mm is not enough to guarantee the destruction of modern armored personnel carriers / infantry fighting vehicles, as well as a small high-explosive action

      Are you serious about 100 mm? belay Even a 76 mm shell had a good high-explosive effect, and here 100 mm! In addition, Bahcha can launch Kastet through the barrel of the ATGM, which greatly increases the range to 5 km. 30 mm is also enough for most light armored vehicles.
      In general, in the future, the T-15 if equipped with a 57 mm module, then a version with 30 mm is not really needed, leaving this modification for Kurgan and at the same time equipping it with Bakhchi. Firstly, the second line of attackers will receive more firepower, secondly, the marines will come in handy.
      But I won’t know what to do with wheeled ones, well, except to drive a fir, yes, against Papuans in peacekeeping operations, yet wheeled vehicles begin to stumble in cross-country ability with increasing weight.
      1. Cruorvult
        Cruorvult 16 June 2016 08: 54
        +3
        You do not read carefully, 100 mm is not enough to destroy the tank, as well as 100 mm TOUR. Any modern armored personnel carrier / infantry fighting vehicle with a maximum body kit holds 30 mm sub-calibers in the forehead, taking into account the fact that we practically do not use them, so new types AU-220 are needed and appear, but it lacks anti-tank systems for now.
        1. Forest
          Forest 16 June 2016 09: 51
          +1
          While we do not have normal BOPS to the ancient C-60 - there is no point in changing 2A70. If the tank does not penetrate, then the 100-mm CS can destroy the BMP and the NATO armored personnel carriers can be guaranteed, unlike the armor-piercing caliber blank C-60.
      2. gallville
        gallville 17 June 2016 12: 41
        0
        Quote: kugelblitz
        In general, in the future, the T-15 if equipped with a 57 mm module,

        So it is necessary to bring it "to mind".
        Quote: kugelblitz
        then a version with 30 mm is not really needed, leaving this modification for Kurgan

        But what about unification? For me, 30mm modules are put on a new BTT solely for the purpose of firing firearm, there are a lot of shells of this caliber. In the future, the caliber will grow.
        Quote: kugelblitz
        and at the same time equipping him with Bakhchi. First, the second line of attackers will receive more firepower

        This is a step in the last century. The whole idea of ​​the new modules is separation from the crew (its first and foremost, the landing during the battle outside). In addition, the melon has its drawbacks, for example, 100mm ptur for the forehead of a modern tank is already not enough.
        Quote: kugelblitz
        secondly the marines come in handy.

        But the Marines and Airborne Forces is "what the doctor ordered."
        Quote: kugelblitz
        But I won’t know what to do with wheeled ones, well, except to drive a fir, yes, against Papuans in peacekeeping operations, yet wheeled vehicles begin to stumble in cross-country ability with increasing weight.

        Fights in urban areas. Modern conflicts from fields and forests are transferred to the infrastructure of the village, suburb, city (as an extreme place). In any case, they are suitable for quickly blocking the main supply lines of a city. For blocking the fields around the city there are tracks, for fighting in the city itself there are t-15s. Although the first two with a naturally full tank and mortars of small and medium caliber are smart enough.
    2. goose
      goose 16 June 2016 14: 30
      0
      Quote: CruorVult
      100 mm is not enough

      Low ballistic cannons with an initial speed of <400 m / s were not originally designed to destroy maneuvering tanks, but they are great against field fortifications and infantry.
    3. Come on
      Come on 16 June 2016 16: 54
      +2
      Quote: CruorVult
      to have 30 tons of weight and a 35mm stick and not even have a missile launcher.


      Take a closer look at the photo, there is a twin installation of the Spaik LR ATGM. The Bundeswehr received the first 20 Pumas without ATGMs, but they will be retrofitted with them, and in the photo there is an already modified turret with ATGMs. Well, I would not call 30-mm-MK 30-2 / ABM a "pukalka", 110mm by 1000m sub-caliber penetration, programmable projectiles for fighting against infantry and aircraft and the corresponding fire control system at the Leo2 level make a Puma or other similar vehicle equipped with such a BM , a very serious opponent.
      1. cosmos111
        cosmos111 16 June 2016 17: 57
        +1
        Quote: Yeah, well.
        . The Bundeswehr received the first 20 Pumas without anti-tank systems,


        On BMP installed tower Lance.

        But a tower of another manufacturer may also be installed.

        For example, the tower of OTO Melara HITFIST.
        1. Come on
          Come on 17 June 2016 00: 51
          +2
          Do you mean the car from the article? Judging by the size, SLA, optics and armament, this tower is similar to the one on Puma. The Puma, which is now adopted by the Bundeswehr, is very different from the prototype and pre-production version. This is a stabilization cage for a gun, an additional skating rink, a motor and a bunch of other things. Of course, you can put another BM, but BM from KMW has probably the most advanced SLA at the moment, at the level of Leo2, although of course it is much more expensive. Then it depends on who will make the order.
    4. avdkrd
      avdkrd 20 June 2016 14: 07
      0
      Quote: CruorVult
      It safely delivers infantry armored personnel carriers, and in the rear, an infantry fighting vehicle is an infantry fighting vehicle that supports it with fire, have 30 tons of weight and a 35mm bullet and not even have an anti-tank missile system. Domestic 100/30 modules are also an unfortunate concept, since 100 mm is not enough to destroy a tank, and 30 mm is not enough to guarantee the destruction of modern armored personnel carriers / infantry fighting vehicles, as well as a small explosive action.

      Even a 30mm fart is a powerful weapon. When the BMP-3 was tested, the T-55 was set as targets. The fire was carried out afloat at a maximum distance of 30mm. After the shelling, the tank presented a dismal sight - multiple penetrations of the barrel (a thick rifled barrel of a 100mm cannon), destroyed optics and sights, demolished all attachments. The high-explosive effect of a 100mm projectile is hardly weaker. Do not tell anyone about the "unsuccessful" concept of 100 / 30mm - Bakhcha is an ideal combination for a fire support vehicle. To combat tanks there are ATGMs and other tanks, but the BMP-3 can "God forbid, everyone." The 9M117M1 "Arkan" may not be a Cornet, but it does 750 mm of armor, and at a distance of 5.5 km ...
      http://worldweapon.ru/tank/bmp3.php
      In Alagez (Armenia). At the same time, “611 ″ and“ 612 ″ passed sea tests in the Sevastopol Bay. The conditions were very difficult, the sea waves reached three points. However, the cars showed excellent seaworthiness and high accuracy of fire afloat. In particular, one of the conditions was firing from a distance of 1500 meters afloat on a coastal target, the role of which was the T-55 tank. On assignment, the tank was removed from storage and equipped with 100% spare parts, it was decided to check the amazing capabilities of the new 30-mm gun. No matter how the tankers asked the testers not to spoil the new car, the effect of what they saw struck even the owners. The car was swept away everything that was mounted on the outside, there was not even a conversation about the integrity of the observation devices and the sight of the tank, a 100-mm gun was pierced in four places, and fractures with cracks appeared on the upper frontal part of the tank.
  9. fa2998
    fa2998 16 June 2016 08: 52
    +4
    Quote: CruorVult
    and not even have an anti-tank missile system.

    Have you read the article? It just provides 2 PU ATGM.
    Quote: CruorVult
    and 30 mm is not enough to guarantee the destruction of modern armored personnel carriers / infantry fighting vehicles

    And our "guaranteed" will have enough 25-35 mm. Like the "Lynx". Of course, you cannot protect the BMP from the sub-caliber "scrap" of MBT, but from the fire of "classmates" - other BMPs and armored personnel carriers must be kept.
    We are building, in fact, light tanks. Light armored tracked vehicles with powerful weapons. Well, they also carry troops on armor! hi
  10. Runx135
    Runx135 16 June 2016 11: 20
    -3
    Good Target, Big .... laughing
  11. Cruorvult
    Cruorvult 16 June 2016 11: 54
    +1
    Quote: Forest
    While we do not have normal BOPS to the ancient C-60 - there is no point in changing 2A70. If the tank does not penetrate, then the 100-mm CS can destroy the BMP and the NATO armored personnel carriers can be guaranteed, unlike the armor-piercing caliber blank C-60.


    With 120 rounds per minute of good range and flatness, I think you can do without sub-calibers for now, rather than shoot from 100 mm at BTR / BMP.

    About the anti-tank systems it is said that it CAN bear, but does not bear, while the dimensions are already significant.
    1. Come on
      Come on 16 June 2016 17: 18
      +1
      Quote: CruorVult
      With 120 rounds per minute of good range and flatness, I think you can do without sub-calibers for now, rather than shoot from 100 mm at BTR / BMP.


      I doubt that it is possible to perforate modern BMPs like Puma, or CV90, and it is unclear what does 120v / m have to do with it?

      Quote: CruorVult
      About the anti-tank systems it is said that it CAN bear, but does not bear, while the dimensions are already significant.


      You look at the first photo carefully, there are just PU ATGMs with an open sash visible. Likewise, BM Cougars will receive their Spaik LR.
  12. Cruorvult
    Cruorvult 16 June 2016 12: 15
    +1
    Quote: Forest
    While we do not have normal BOPS to the ancient C-60 - there is no point in changing 2A70. If the tank does not penetrate, then the 100-mm CS can destroy the BMP and the NATO armored personnel carriers can be guaranteed, unlike the armor-piercing caliber blank C-60.


    By the way, I dig a plate, https: //vk.com/page-79534_9439388 It turns out 40 mm new telescopes have a breakdown of 80 mm per 1000 meters, and the BB for s-60 is 100 mm, and the NATO BPS for our 2a42 is 55 mm per 1000.
    1. goose
      goose 16 June 2016 15: 08
      0
      Quote: CruorVult
      Incidentally, dug up a tablet

      We have different techniques in breaking through, according to our technique, the projectile should all fly into the hole. To bring it to NATO it is necessary to increase the value by another 20%.
      Those. NATO penetration of 50 mm - this is our 40 mm approximately.
      1. Come on
        Come on 16 June 2016 17: 23
        +2
        Quote: goose
        We have different techniques in breaking through, according to our technique, the projectile should all fly into the hole.


        But what about NATO? Not completely? Half or stuck? It is unclear what you mean. I think the action of the projectile after breaking through, in the form of fragments, is important.
    2. Come on
      Come on 16 June 2016 17: 20
      +1
      Quote: CruorVult
      40 mm new telescopes have a breakdown of 80 mm


      If you are talking about Bofors 40mm from CV9040, then they actually have 140mm penetration, not 80mm. The COP of this machine, with an article has 110mm penetration.
      1. potroshenko
        potroshenko 17 June 2016 11: 58
        0
        The Bofors 40mm is not a telescope.
        1. Come on
          Come on 17 June 2016 17: 11
          0
          How is it not a telescope ?? On the CV9040 stands Bofors with telescopic BC. Here, admire:
  13. Valeriy 1979
    Valeriy 1979 16 June 2016 17: 06
    -3
    Time teaches nothing to Germany
  14. Schulz
    Schulz 16 June 2016 17: 55
    0
    Also, the tower is equipped with a coaxial machine gun ...

    7,62mm
    The type of engine is not specified, however, there is reason to believe that one of the existing serial high-power diesel engines is used. According to the developer, the existing power plant provides the new BMP with high mobility and throughput.

    The powerpacks for the KF31 and KF41 Lynx options are said by Rheinmetall to develop 563 kW and 700+ kW respectively, giving top speeds greater than 65 km / h and 70 km / h.
    KF31 with a combat weight of more than 30 tons

    The IFV, moreover, comes in two versions: the KF31, as shown at Eurosatory, which weighs up to 38 tonnes and can accommodate six soldiers as well as the crew of three; and the KF41, which is slightly larger, weighs around 44 tonnes and can carry eight soldiers as well as the crew. Both versions can be configured for alternative roles.

    PS: in my amateurish opinion, a good car turned out.
  15. voyaka uh
    voyaka uh 16 June 2016 19: 21
    +4
    KAZ, KAZ is needed.
    Imagine this in Syria. And on her is a guy in jeans and sneakers
    induces TOU ... And ... sad
  16. Victorio
    Victorio 17 June 2016 00: 44
    0
    will be able to shoot and ride without electronics?
  17. dmitriyruss
    dmitriyruss 17 June 2016 00: 48
    -1
    No doubt, the technology and the Germans were always ok, but who will sit in it during the war? The rising Turkish-Arab generation? or maybe beautiful muscular guys in pink panties and leather caps? Well these .... Tolerasts
    1. Come on
      Come on 17 June 2016 00: 58
      +1
      Do you have strange ideas about Germany, what does the Turkish Arabs, or pink panties? Although it is clear from where all this ..
      1. AllXVahhaB
        AllXVahhaB 17 June 2016 09: 14
        +1
        Quote: Yeah, well.
        Do you have strange ideas about Germany, what does the Turkish Arabs, or pink panties? Although it is clear from where all this ..

        Here I have a similar idea of ​​Germany ... And you know where? I come from Kazakhstan - almost half of my classmates are Germans, descendants of exiled Volga Germans. Everyone now lives in Germany, half was visiting, that is, I know Germany not as a tourist ...
        1. Come on
          Come on 17 June 2016 17: 27
          +2
          They also watch Russian TV horror stories, so no wonder. And if in fact, then the Muslims in Germany are between 2,8 - 4,5 mio. from 81-82 myo population. Moreover, the majority in Germany were born, of which in turn the majority laid on Islam and the traditions of their ancestors. So there are no more than 200-300 thousand of such traditional Muslims throughout Germany. To know Germany not as a tourist it is not enough to be a couple of times for two weeks, you need to live in it. Then much will become clear. In Russia, the problem of Islamization is much higher and more dangerous than in Europe, in Moscow alone there are only 3mio. What does the Russian Muslims identify with less and less with Russian culture and rules of conduct.
        2. Schulz
          Schulz 17 June 2016 18: 51
          +1
          Quote: AllXVahhaB

          Here I have a similar view of Germany ...

          Do you even think about the meaning of what you are commenting on?
          who will sit in it during the war? The rising Turkish-Arab generation? or maybe beautiful muscular guys in pink panties and leather caps?

          Well, how many beautiful muscular tankers in pink panties and leather caps did you find in Germany?
  18. AllXVahhaB
    AllXVahhaB 17 June 2016 09: 16
    0
    About the floating armored vehicles. Universality is good only on the one hand, on the other - damage to certain qualities. Why armored vehicles in Saudi Arabia the opportunity to swim? but there are other conditions and tasks:
    1. Come on
      Come on 17 June 2016 17: 29
      -1
      Well, the Koreans of the theater of war have many reservoirs, so their K21 can swim, but the protection with firepower is at a high level. In my opinion, at the moment they have created the best floating infantry fighting vehicle.
  19. Pilat2009
    Pilat2009 27 November 2016 12: 41
    0
    BMP-3 killer
    Just how much will it cost?
    Nevertheless, the UAE and the Saudis can well afford
  20. Pilat2009
    Pilat2009 27 November 2016 12: 45
    0
    Quote: Yeah, well.
    What does the Russian Muslims identify with less and less with Russian culture and rules of conduct.

    Yes, it’s probably in Russia there are mass demonstrations and pogroms, it’s probably in Russia with the connivance of the police they feel women? I’ll add that we also have Muslims who are violet to Islam except to mention Ramadan
  21. Diviz
    Diviz 28 November 2016 20: 13
    0
    car for sabotage groups. and so in battle it’s a thing to turn into a sieve.