Military Review

The Sprut-SDM-1 self-propelled gun began testing in the Pskov Region

73
The Sprut-SDM-1 self-propelled anti-tank gun is being tested at the Struga test site in the Pskov region, reports RIA News Post Commander of the Airborne Forces Vladimir Shamanov.




“In the coming months, during the tests, the artillery units of the 76 airborne assault division and the specialists of the Third Central Research Institute of the Russian Defense Ministry must confirm the tactical and technical characteristics of the gun,” said Shamanov.

He stressed that "the results of the tests will be handed over to a special commission for the state assessment and examination."

Earlier, Shamanov reported that the first six modernized Sprut-SDM-1 self-propelled guns would be sent to the troops in 2017. The paratroopers conducted firing of this gun in the middle of June at the Strugi Krasnye range.

The Sprut-SDM-1 gun will replace the previous 2C25 modification that has been in service with the Airborne Forces for more than 10 years.
Photos used:
http://bastion-karpenko.ru
73 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Andrey K
    Andrey K 26 June 2016 09: 00
    +27
    "Octopus-SDM-1" for landing, taking into account the changing tactics of using this type of troops, the equipment is very necessary. Improved performance characteristics of the gun itself + another machine gun good
    1. Alex_Rarog
      Alex_Rarog 26 June 2016 09: 06
      +14
      The landing should have strong firepower, with high maneuverability!
      1. Khariton
        Khariton 26 June 2016 09: 31
        +3
        Quote: Alex_Rarog
        The landing should have strong firepower, with high maneuverability!

        This is supposedly "Nona" legendary near Slavyansk (Banderites soaked)))? Only even cooler? I'm not a specialist, correct if that ...
        1. Sharapov
          Sharapov 26 June 2016 09: 45
          +21
          Nona - this is a cannon-howitzer-mortar - hence the purpose is to fire from closed fire positions.
          Here we are talking about the fight against tanks and well-fortified objects - direct fire.
          In fact, Nona and Octopus complement each other on the battlefield.
    2. The comment was deleted.
    3. siberalt
      siberalt 26 June 2016 10: 01
      +5
      Standing 10 years in service is not entirely bad. Perhaps it is better to supplement, rather than replace? request
      1. Serg 122
        Serg 122 26 June 2016 10: 40
        0
        Well done Naumets, all the best and new is given to him first. The rest - by the residual principle - unfortunately ...
      2. Verdun
        Verdun 26 June 2016 10: 44
        +2
        Quote: siberalt
        Standing 10 years in service is not entirely bad. Perhaps it is better to supplement, rather than replace?

        Before talking about the replacement, it is necessary that the gun is fully tested. From the information available it is not very clear what the essence of the modification is and whether it exceeds the previous one or is it just an old horse sold for a new one, slightly twisting the tail.
      3. NEXUS
        NEXUS 26 June 2016 11: 22
        +5
        Quote: siberalt
        Standing 10 years in service is not entirely bad. Perhaps it is better to supplement, rather than replace? request

        Now our gunsmiths are leaning on new guns, in light of the fact that much will soon switch to the Almaty platform with new barrels. We must also tighten the airborne forces.
        Another would be to equip each projectile with "impulse correction" in order to increase the accuracy many times ...
        1. ramzes1776
          ramzes1776 26 June 2016 11: 51
          +3
          Judging by the photo of the place in the tower, even less than in 72-ke.
          1. Forest
            Forest 26 June 2016 11: 56
            +6
            72-ki armor in the tower dozens of centimeters, right there - protection only against machine guns.
  2. Observer2014
    Observer2014 26 June 2016 09: 01
    +14
    Himself "Octopus" handsome! I don’t know how anyone, but in my opinion this is one of the most beautiful tanks in the literal sense. Yes, easy, but a tank. And with a self-propelled gun they call him so that there would be fewer temptations to attack enemies head on. Only an ambush. And a quick maneuver, despite the rivers, is bridges no bridges.
    1. venaya
      venaya 26 June 2016 09: 10
      +14
      Even if it’s not a tank, but the speed on the road reaches up to 70 km / h, it overcomes water barriers up to 10 km / h even with ten waves of water. In terms of utility in a real battle mode it can surpass tanks, easily.
      1. Vladimirets
        Vladimirets 26 June 2016 09: 18
        +15
        Quote: venaya
        It can surpass tanks in utility in a real battle mode.

        Of course, especially if
        Quote: venaya
        with a wave of water at ten points.

        then he surpasses many ships. smile You probably meant the Beaufort scale, because the sea roughness scale ends with 9 points. And according to Beaufort 10 points: "Very high waves (maximum height - 12,5 m, average - 9 m) with long crests bending downward. The resulting foam is blown out by the wind in large flakes in the form of dense white stripes. The sea surface is white with foam. Strong rumble waves are like blows. " wink
        1. Observer2014
          Observer2014 26 June 2016 10: 08
          +8
          Vladimirets
          Quote: And according to Beaufort 10 points: "Very high waves (maximum height - 12,5 m, average - 9 m) with long crests curving downward. The resulting foam is blown out by the wind in large flakes in the form of dense white stripes. The sea surface is white with foam. The strong crashing of the waves is like a shock. " wink

          Well, yes. Something our colleague exaggerated a little with points repeat I live five minutes walk from the sea. Naturally, I saw a storm (albeit not a sea ice). Well, at 9 points I didn’t see a storm when, frankly, I saw about six points. I can’t approach the shore. I’m silent about landing on the berg. So it's near the shore. And what is being done on the high seas! Horror.
          1. Alex777
            Alex777 26 June 2016 10: 53
            +2
            3 points limit for the Octopus.
    2. ty60
      ty60 26 June 2016 22: 17
      0
      BMP base. I would venture to assume that the 105mm smoothbore
  3. Banishing liberoids
    Banishing liberoids 26 June 2016 09: 07
    +10
    If you look at the photo, it’s not an octopus, it’s a whole squid! am
  4. rotmistr60
    rotmistr60 26 June 2016 09: 12
    +9
    If we compare the weapons, equipment and second-hand equipment of the Airborne Forces of the 80s with today's, then the differences are very noticeable. "We should stand for a day, but hold out for the night" (Malchish-Kibalchish), that is, at least another five years without major conflicts. And then potential enemies themselves will bite the bit. Although they are still trying to put pressure only psychologically and economically.
    1. rotmistr60
      rotmistr60 26 June 2016 09: 56
      +4
      Again the quiet minuscule man showed up. Maybe the moderators should pay attention to this? Half-way minus one without expressing one’s opinion. This is not a matter of minuses, which do not give a damn, but in the culture of behavior on the site. Petty quiet man starts to get nervous, which is what he can count on.
      1. Orang
        Orang 26 June 2016 11: 01
        +4
        By the way, yes. Someone negatively unambiguously positive topics. Okay, there would be something
        political, here the debate is played out in earnest, the pros and cons are like a machine gun. He may not read the topic, he ran in, stumbled on, like a chicken.
        Nafig expose it, do not pay attention and all.
    2. cap
      cap 26 June 2016 11: 34
      0
      Quote: rotmistr60
      If we compare the weapons, equipment and second-hand equipment of the Airborne Forces of the 80s with today's, then the differences are very noticeable. "We should stand for a day, but hold out for the night" (Malchish-Kibalchish), that is, at least another five years without major conflicts. And then potential enemies themselves will bite the bit. Although they are still trying to put pressure only psychologically and economically.


      So far, the focus is on the economy and "internal" Parmesan eaters.
      The role of clockwork s..ki prepare Ukrov and Europeans.
      The paratroopers are all the best, they sit on the scruff of the enemy.
      And on the face there is something to embed.
  5. hirurg
    hirurg 26 June 2016 09: 14
    +8
    Good car, for the task of landing.
  6. chenia
    chenia 26 June 2016 09: 16
    +7
    It is high time to continue the topic of Octopus-CER for the PT units of conventional motorized rifles.

    Introduce a company of tank destroyers to the SMEs, and a battalion into the division. And remove these problems from artillery.
  7. Khariton
    Khariton 26 June 2016 09: 25
    +1
    Almost off topic guys, but tonight doc. the film about Armata was at the Zvezda shopping center! Very interesting, a lot of new things were shown and told .. Be sure to look! I think somebody will post a video and an analytical article here! hi
    1. siberalt
      siberalt 26 June 2016 10: 05
      0
      What is the movie called? Curious to see.
    2. Barakuda
      Barakuda 26 June 2016 10: 08
      0
      There dofiga on the "star" about the armature, which one to lay out .. at least hint about what ..?
      1. Barakuda
        Barakuda 26 June 2016 10: 11
        +4
        Well so I'm unanswered
  8. Mountain shooter
    Mountain shooter 26 June 2016 09: 33
    +8
    As a former anti-tank officer, he traveled in BRDM-ah, but he also had to carry and shoot the Rapiers. So one could only dream of such "Octopuses" (since both are in one bottle). And why only the landing party? Which motorized riflemen will refuse instead of the regular anti-tank platoons? A couple of them per company, this is a full-fledged battery per battalion. Taking into account the armament of the BMP-3 and all kinds of anti-tank stuff among motorized riflemen - what is it to break through such a defense? Such a battalion is a NATO tank brigade? And how many of those brigades do these Gay Europeans have?
    1. chenia
      chenia 26 June 2016 10: 03
      +3
      Unfortunately, the T-12 was good for the M-60, and against slow-moving ATGMs, all sorts of crap was already deliberate.

      The topic of Octopus-CER was covered due to the collapse of the Union. And instead of the T-12, Sprut-B is introduced. Octopus -B is a strong system, it will fulfill its task (from an ambush), but eternal memory is calculated.
      And 6,5 t is not a very convenient system (albeit self-propelled).

      Quote: Mountain Shooter
      motorized rifles refuse, instead of full-time anti-tank platoons?


      Well, it’s fat (in the anti-tank detachment of the SMB), and instead of the anti-tank batteries in the SMEs (in the late 80s, the anti-aircraft division was introduced), the company of tank destroyers (9 pieces) is just that.

      Fri reserve for SMEs, and if that. then to reinforce the capabilities of SMEs can be given to the platoon.
      1. berezin1987
        berezin1987 26 June 2016 10: 44
        +3
        I agree about the rapier. Towed anti-tank guns have outlived their own. Their calculation in conditions of maneuver warfare are suicide bombers. In the presence of thermal imagers and drones, there is practically no chance of a sudden shot from an ambush, because the target should be within direct line of sight.
    2. My doctor
      My doctor 26 June 2016 11: 14
      0
      Quote: Mountain Shooter
      Like a former anti-tanker

      Quote: Mountain Shooter
      Taking into account the BMP-3 armament and all kinds of anti-tank stuff from motorized riflemen, what is the reason for breaking such a defense? Such a battalion - the NATO tank brigade?

      It seems to me, far from military affairs, that in the west the tanks are not coming in the first echelon, but support the infantry with fire at a distance and only in cases of close contact, in other cases artillery and aviation. But the fight against BMP for the octopus is the most.
  9. Barakuda
    Barakuda 26 June 2016 10: 05
    0
    And what’s been taking so long? like a secret from the Chinese or what?
  10. berezin1987
    berezin1987 26 June 2016 10: 09
    +2
    The octopus car is certainly good, but it has one serious drawback - very weak armor. But if KAZ "Afghanit" was installed on the car, then the car would not be worth the price. The biggest threat to armored vehicles today is ATGMs and RPGs, and potential opponents have a lot of this stuff. KAZ will easily intercept a subsonic ATGM or a grenade, and in the future will be able to destroy BOPSs.
    1. Phantom Revolution
      Phantom Revolution 26 June 2016 10: 56
      +1
      Do you suggest ARMAT to parachute?)
      1. berezin1987
        berezin1987 26 June 2016 11: 40
        0
        Did I really talk about armature? I spoke about KAZ installed on armata platform cars. Do you think KAZ greatly increases the mass? Most of these tank complexes weigh about 1,5 tons. But the tank itself is not small. DZ modules cannot be installed on many light vehicles because of the danger of breaking thin armor, and KAZ solves this problem. A similar complex is already on the BMP Kurganets-25
        1. Phantom Revolution
          Phantom Revolution 26 June 2016 12: 25
          +1
          Quote: berezin1987
          A similar complex is already on the BMP Kurganets-25

          How many BMP Kurganets-25 have already been accepted into the troops, how many are going? Apparently, everything is not so fine with KAZ, possibly at a price, perhaps also at production.

          If there were funds for everything about everything, then for a long time instead of t-72 old modifications and 72 BZ, there were T-90MS.
          1. berezin1987
            berezin1987 26 June 2016 17: 26
            0
            KAZ is now in trials, this is first. Secondly, t-90 began to produce too late, and it is much better to get two t-72б3 for the same money. The t-90 will replace the t-14 armata
  11. voyaka uh
    voyaka uh 26 June 2016 10: 19
    0
    Isn’t it easier to distribute the Cornets?
    If gopnik in jeans so successfully cope with tanks
    with the help of TOU, then the paratroopers should not have any problems
    using ATGMs.
    1. bmv04636
      bmv04636 26 June 2016 10: 42
      +3
      caliber projectile even your shroud won't stop
      1. voyaka uh
        voyaka uh 26 June 2016 11: 25
        +3
        I do not argue with this, OBPS is a powerful thing.
        But is it wise for them to shoot from high, visible
        bulletproof systems?
        You need to get to certain places in the tank in order to damage
        and self-propelled guns just get into any place.
        1. bmv04636
          bmv04636 26 June 2016 12: 11
          +1
          disguise sir has not yet been canceled
          1. Denimax
            Denimax 26 June 2016 14: 00
            +1
            Quote: bmv04636
            disguise sir has not yet been canceled

            After the first shot, camouflage can be forgotten.
            If KV from an ambush smashed a column of equipment, then he himself grabbed hits.
        2. ty60
          ty60 26 June 2016 22: 25
          0
          Light self-propelled gun. With bulletproof armor
    2. chenia
      chenia 26 June 2016 10: 47
      +4
      Quote: voyaka uh
      Isn’t it easier to distribute the Cornets?


      One must understand the concept of the use of airborne troops. They capture important areas, bridgeheads. (Let's be honest, this is possible with a strong enemy only at the beginning or end of the war, when the air defense is either not sufficiently deployed, or already quite crushed), where there is no serious defense.

      Then they burrow and wait for the main forces to approach. In view of insufficient artillery saturation, Octopus. as well as BMD with the "melon" module. takes over some of these functions of artillery.

      But most importantly, such a system is the most effective anti-tank vehicle, and no anti-tank vehicle can replace it.
      1. voyaka uh
        voyaka uh 26 June 2016 11: 20
        +7
        "But most importantly, such a system is the most effective PT means,
        and no ATGM can replace it .. "////

        ATGM launched from the ground is hard to detect and therefore difficult
        to crush. ATGM easy and quick to move - unnoticed! - to another place
        after the shot.
        A self-propelled gun is a large object, it is easy to detect it, and it is difficult to disguise it.
        And the saddest thing is that her armor is cardboard, bulletproof.
        The moment the tank detects it ... negative
        For this reason, anti-tank self-propelled guns disappeared from the armies of all countries.
        1. chenia
          chenia 26 June 2016 11: 53
          +4
          Quote: voyaka uh
          And the saddest thing is that her armor is cardboard, bulletproof.
          The moment the tank detects it ...
          For this reason, anti-tank self-propelled guns disappeared from the armies of all countries.


          Well, firstly, no ATGM throws back (the usual compartment has them in the right amount). No problems.

          Octopus is a regiment reserve reserve system. Fri lines located in the depths of the defense of the regiment. The task of the PT reserve is to stop the attack. to the enemy’s TB. That will allow (give time) to tighten reserves, or prepare a counterattack.

          This is an ambush in a tank-dangerous direction, 6 systems should hit 15-18 tanks. to thwart an enemy TB attack.
          With a probability of 0,5 and a combat rate of 4 shots / min. battery in 3-5 minutes performs this task (as a rule, perishing). And this is for towed systems.

          Buried in the trench of the Octopus (here and the variable clearance is needed to dig less) and only the tower sticks out, you even can’t always take it from the ATGM. And the RP grenade (the one that sweeps the calculation of the towed gun) also needs an almost direct hit. Well, the crew is mentally more stable (splinters and bullets are not so annoying) and that means its shooting is more effective.

          And most importantly, even dying to complete the task.
        2. Forest
          Forest 26 June 2016 12: 00
          +3
          So if we had the 3 generation ATGM, then there would be no questions. And when we are stamped at the level of the 80's, then we have to rivet the guns.
          1. Denimax
            Denimax 26 June 2016 14: 25
            +1
            Quote: Forest
            So if we had an ATGM of 3 generations, then there would be no questions.

            Over-the-horizon ATGMs are of course preferable. Given how many they can be dropped instead of one self-propelled guns. Which turns out to be not landing at all.
      2. The comment was deleted.
    3. alpamys
      alpamys 26 June 2016 10: 52
      +2
      Quote: voyaka uh
      Isn’t it easier to distribute the Cornets?
      If gopnik in jeans so successfully cope with tanks
      with the help of TOU, then the paratroopers should not have any problems
      using ATGMs.

      in our company there was a detachment of ATGMs in each company, to increase the number of pturists, it will be cheap and very cheerful.
    4. Phantom Revolution
      Phantom Revolution 26 June 2016 10: 58
      +1
      Quote: voyaka uh
      If gopnik in jeans so successfully cope with tanks
      with the help of TOU, then the paratroopers should not have any problems
      using ATGMs.

      Gopnik in jeans?) Well, well, these TOU calculations are worth its weight in gold and undergo intensive training at military bases. And jeans are worn to mix with the local population if something happens.
      1. voyaka uh
        voyaka uh 26 June 2016 11: 34
        +2
        They are trained, of course.
        But saw them firing?
        Syrian tanks are waiting, sitting on plastic chairs, with a bottle of Coca-Cola, under an awning from the sun. Why? They know they’re hard to spot -
        amid the chaos of bushes, buildings, trees. And not afraid.

        Self-propelled guns will not have such a thrill. Large, engine roar, exhaust.
        It is audible and visible per kilometer. But he cannot protect himself. No armor.
        1. chenia
          chenia 26 June 2016 12: 07
          +1
          Quote: voyaka uh
          But saw them firing?
          Syrian tanks are waiting, sitting on plastic chairs, with a bottle of Coca-Cola, under an awning from the sun. Why? They know they’re hard to spot -
          amid the chaos of bushes, buildings, trees. And not afraid.


          This is a special case (no more than an anti-terrorist operation), and the Octopus system is designed to conduct classical military operations between regular armies.
          1. voyaka uh
            voyaka uh 26 June 2016 13: 50
            0
            "and the Sprut system is designed to conduct classic combat operations between regular armies" ////

            You are preparing for a war that does not and will not be.
            There are no fools to oppose the regular army,
            acting "classical methods" using
            the same "classical methods".
            Nobody wants to lose. What is happening in Syria -
            this is the modern war of the 21st century. And she must learn to win.
            Imagine the Octopus in Syria. Would you like to ride it into battle?
            .
            1. chenia
              chenia 26 June 2016 14: 07
              +1
              Quote: voyaka uh
              There are no fools to oppose the regular army,
              acting "classical methods" using
              the same "classical methods".


              That's right, as long as there is an appropriate organization and armament, which is mentioned

              Quote: voyaka uh
              There are no fools to oppose the regular army,



              И


              Quote: voyaka uh
              war, which is not and never will be.


              in general, the availability of appropriate funds is a deterrent, and one cannot give slack and create the illusion of an easy victory.
            2. ty60
              ty60 26 June 2016 22: 30
              0
              Try to drop Merkava hi
          2. The comment was deleted.
        2. Phantom Revolution
          Phantom Revolution 26 June 2016 12: 20
          +1
          Quote: voyaka uh
          But saw them firing?

          What is on YouTube is not an indicator of all calculations.

          Quote: voyaka uh
          Self-propelled guns will not have such a thrill. Large, engine roar, exhaust.
          It is audible and visible per kilometer. But he cannot protect himself. No armor.

          Any equipment will be heard per kilometer, if it is not with an electric motor.

          Well, there is no reservation, because this self-propelled gun has other tasks than taking the city by storm. And the Syrians alas and sad upset in some cases. Any equipment, regardless of its armor, will be vulnerable in all conditions, especially urban ones without proper cover, there is no invulnerable tank.

          Well, you won’t throw a tank from a parachute, alas, ah. For the Airborne Forces, in fact, the task is to hold out until the arrival of the main forces and no more, therefore they make the appropriate equipment for them. How to revise the concept of the Airborne Forces, another technique.
          1. chenia
            chenia 26 June 2016 12: 35
            +2
            Quote: Phantom Revolution
            How to revise the concept of the Airborne Forces, other equipment.


            So we have already reviewed it. At the beginning of the conflict (while others click their beak), the Airborne Forces capture the desired areas. Here, if the first to seize the "glade" and before the war will not come (more likely the conflict will be over third countries).
            And if the war has begun, the airborne units turn into "heavy divisions and fight accordingly, having the appropriate heavy equipment.

            We extinguished the enemy, crushed his anti-aircraft defense and you can remember the old.
      2. The comment was deleted.
  12. Lt. Air Force stock
    Lt. Air Force stock 26 June 2016 10: 44
    +1
    Chrysanthemum-C is needed by the Airborne Forces, in any case, it would have acted better against enemy armored vehicles.
    1. Orang
      Orang 26 June 2016 11: 06
      0
      There is still manpower and fortifications, ATGM will be expensive to use them
      1. Lt. Air Force stock
        Lt. Air Force stock 26 June 2016 11: 44
        +1
        Quote: Orang
        There is still manpower and fortifications, ATGM will be expensive to use them

        There are kind of thermobaric charges for Chrysanthemum-C. Yes, and the Airborne Forces is not the kind of troops on which to save. In addition, it is supposed to use them in the rear of the enemy, where efficiency should come to the fore, and not economy.
        1. Orang
          Orang 26 June 2016 13: 34
          0
          Maybe so. Experience will show.
  13. chunga-changa
    chunga-changa 26 June 2016 11: 16
    0
    It is a pity they did not write how the Octopus-SDM-1 differs from the Octopus-SD. I suppose that the new electronics, the scope, may be the engine. In any case, the tests will not be too long, the machine, in principle, has long been in service.
    1. berezin1987
      berezin1987 26 June 2016 11: 44
      0
      The base from the BMD-4m was used in the new octopus, there is a new gun and the OMS.
  14. ramzes1776
    ramzes1776 26 June 2016 11: 48
    +1
    How can the anti-tank Octopus replace Sao Nona performing the role of artillery striking in the airborne forces ??? And in general, as I understand it, this Octopus is not intended for landing by a parachute system. Well, what's the catch? Isn’t it easier to make a universal Chrysanthemum capable of landing with personnel?
    1. bmv04636
      bmv04636 26 June 2016 12: 12
      0
      125 mm, the caliber is written the same anti-tank gun and how it shoots from the water one sight for sore eyes
  15. bmv04636
    bmv04636 26 June 2016 12: 14
    +6
    that's how it is, but you are weak
  16. chenia
    chenia 26 June 2016 13: 32
    +1
    Quote: voyaka uh
    I do not argue with this, OBPS is a powerful thing.
    But is it wise for them to shoot from high, visible
    bulletproof systems?


    Octopus-SD is an excellent system for the Airborne Forces.

    Well, you need to develop a theme (or rather continue) to create tank destroyers for conventional motorized rifle.

    Firstly, the system can be heavier up to 30 tons (to hell with it. That will not swim). with powerful upper armor and corresponding (tank) turret. and with elements of AZ and DZ.

    Secondly, a variable clearance.
    Thirdly, a device for self-digging. dump.
    Fourth, with built-in and hinged elements of camouflage (visual and thermal) and construction of a smoke screen.

    Crew, enough for two people (mech.vod and commander .- with full interchangeability). This is not a tank. Do not attack. There is a fire card. shelling sectors (primary, secondary) identified. ambush fire. Engineering equipment - there is a dump, then they will be corrected with shovels.

    The company and KV companies should have BRDM with PTURAMI (increased range. And then to a greater extent bullets on helicopters.

    Thus. tank destroyers acquire the qualities of a tank in a trench. where the efficiency coefficient (ambush shooting) is 1 to 8-12.
    And to suppress them (and even more so to destroy) significant funds are needed.
    1. voyaka uh
      voyaka uh 26 June 2016 14: 01
      0
      "" The fire card is there. shelling sectors (main, additional) are defined. fire from an ambush. "////

      One shot, and if unsuccessful, the tank will break it into small pieces. Moreover, any shell, which will turn up.
      Together with the fire card ... belay

      Not a single army has artillery self-propelled tank destroyers.
      1. chenia
        chenia 26 June 2016 15: 33
        +2
        Unfortunately, you did not even understand what it was about. You there at your place will propose an appropriate reorganization of the armed forces. Fucking fighter aircraft, tank formations and nuclear weapons against gopnik in jeans.

        Then you will transfer us, where they sent you in Hebrew.


        Quote: voyaka uh
        One shot, and if unsuccessful, the tank will break it into small pieces. Moreover, any shell, which will turn up.
        Together with the fire card ...


        To get in fact into a tank in the trench, which is in ambush, and into a three-meter fool located openly, are different things.

        We’ll lay everything in the ground, everything will be dust.

        the difference is how much you can pull.

        About two years ago, on TV on Discovery Channel, dashing British tankers fired from Challenger (with all rangefinders and ballistic computers) in a 1,5 m by 0,6 m safe - there were 5 pounds (1 km of range).

        We got from the 4th time (we shot 2 bps for shooting - well, there is most likely a translation error (more practical) and 2OF. In a calm environment.

        The question is, how many tanks will this system pull before it dies?

        Response
        in Russian: knock out 9 tanks, and become a hero posthumously.

        in Hebrew why the heck is to die at all, it means knocking out 4 tanks, giving a smoke screen and getting off the OP (by the way, the task has already been completed if the firing was carried out by the unit), in general, save your train ... and fire card.



        Quote: voyaka uh
        Not a single army has artillery self-propelled tank destroyers.


        firstly and often.
        1. voyaka uh
          voyaka uh 26 June 2016 18: 15
          +2
          "firstly and often." ////

          Long gone. You spend a few financial
          funds for a completely meaningless technique.
          Instead of using the money on existing tanks
          KAZs and prevent the defeat of tank units, as in Syria.
          1. chenia
            chenia 26 June 2016 19: 01
            +2
            Quote: voyaka uh
            Long gone. You spend a few financial
            funds for a completely meaningless technique.


            As long as there are tank brigades and tank divisions, there will be artillery anti-tank equipment. Moreover, they are more effective against KAZ and DZ. And the conversation is about the reserve reserve regiment and above. Do you even understand when and why it is needed, and when it is applied. And ATGMs have long been in every rifle division.

            Artillery anti-tank weapons were and are (see organization and armament) as towed artillery. And much more vulnerable.

            Understanding the creation of a clean tank destroyer came in the late 80s.

            As for the financial situation, there were 40 tanks in SMEs in TB, and 9 tank destroyers. which are generally cheaper than tanks - an unbearable load?

            And this is instead of 9 ATGM complexes, and plus for the states after 90 years, first 1 battalion. 6 pieces of T-12, - (they created a PT division in SMEs), and then they stuffed the second battery. And now instead of the T-12 they put the Octopus-B. An open over 6 tons gun.

            And what are the requirements for a tank destroyer, I have already voiced.

            And the irony about the gun’s fire card is the result of your misunderstanding why 3 crew members are not needed (unlike the tank).
          2. ty60
            ty60 26 June 2016 22: 37
            0
            Excuse me, where are the tank units being smashed in Syria? Weren't you and Ishil confused?
    2. ramzes1776
      ramzes1776 27 June 2016 14: 28
      +1
      Why invent something if there are already Chrysanthemums for motorized rifles to fight tanks, and you can also put Terminators-2 into service.
  17. gg.na
    gg.na 26 June 2016 18: 58
    +1
    The landing force must be highly maneuverable and in terms of firepower must not be inferior to motorized rifle units! They are damn it in "one" will hold the bridgehead occupied by them until the rest what ... Which means firepower will play an important role in battle!
  18. kolexxx
    kolexxx 26 June 2016 20: 37
    0
    An octopus is called a cannon because the customer of the GRAU (gunners), and not the GABTU (tankers) If the customer of the GABTU were called a light tank.