Military Review

European programs on armored combat vehicles

127




The first retraining course for crews on new Puma infantry fighting vehicles began in February 2016 of the year (photo above)

In Europe, several interesting programs are being implemented, in which combat armored vehicles of a new generation are being developed. The adoption of the European armies of some models is already in full swing.

For the German army 2016, the year will be remarkable, as its first Panzergrenadierbataillon (PzGrenBtl) 33 motorized infantry battalion will shift from the Marder 45-year-old infantry fighting vehicle to the new Puma machine, which the manufacturer describes "as the most powerful infantry fighting vehicle in the world."

In June 2015, the joint venture PSM (Projekt System Management) officially delivered the first production machines Puma to the 92 training motorized infantry battalion deployed at the Armored Training Center in Münster, which made it possible to start training courses for trainers as part of the preparatory process for obtaining new equipment.


Honored German BMP Marder

Passed with enthusiasm

In January 2016, Marder BMP commanders, gunners and drivers from the 33rd battalion were the first to take courses on the transition to new equipment. Students were delighted with the capabilities of the new BMP. “We now have a fully stabilized weapon system, which, no doubt, is very different from the Marder weapon system, because the vehicle had to stop to fire,” says one of the students. - That is, we can now fight in the same ranks with the main combat a tank (MBT) Leopard. "

The full transition phase for each company will last three months, starting from individual training and ending with collective training at company level, and at the end of this phase, each unit will return to the location of its part with the new Puma machines that it will operate. Each battalion will receive a Puma 32 BMP. They will go into service with the battalion headquarters (two vehicles), two motorized infantry companies (14 vehicles) and the headquarters of the third rifle company (two vehicles). Before operational deployment, a third company can be provided with a complete set of Puma machines.

In the autumn of 2016, the 112 th motorized infantry battalion will begin a training course on Puma machines, which will end in the 2017 year, when the 92 th motorized infantry battalion replaces it. Ultimately, eight motorized infantry battalions will be put into service, although the army assumes that this process will last 8-10 for years before all units restore full combat readiness. Four battalions with Marder machines will be in readiness until the stage of transition to new equipment is completed.

A joint venture between PSM, established equally by Krauss-Maffei Wegmann (KMW) and Rheinmetall Defense, was awarded a contract in 2004 for the design and development of a replacement for the Rheinmetall Landsysteme tracked vehicle Marder 1. This BMP was put into service in the 1971 year, and in July 2009, the last contract for the mass production of a small batch was issued.

The initial need was identified in Puma's 405 machines, but in June, the 2012 Department of Defense reduced this number to 342 BMP plus eight cars for driver training, which was a consequence of the reduction in the number of German army. The last car is scheduled to be delivered in 2020 year. PSM representatives point out that the Puma machine is designed to “protect and successfully carry out hostilities” in asymmetric conflicts, as well as high-intensity conflicts.

European programs on armored combat vehicles


The initial order of the German army on the 272 machines Boxer included 72 ambulances

Cat with character

The Puma crew consists of three people - the commander, the gunner and the driver, and the 6 man is located in the troop compartment. The installation of a remote controlled tower allowed all crew members to be placed in the hull. The turret is armed with an 30-mm selective-powered cannon Mauser MK30-2 / ABM (Air Burst Munition - an air explosive), which fires armor-piercing projectile projectiles and armored-piercing with a remote fuse.

The ammunition carried in the car includes 200 ready-made 30-mm rounds plus 200 in the stowage for the main gun, 1000 5,56-mm rounds plus 1000 in the stowage for the Heckler & Koch (H&K) MG4 coaxial machine gun. The army intends to replace the MG4 with the new 7,62mm H&K MG5A1 machine gun, which allows the shooter to select a rate of fire of 600, 700 or 800 rounds per minute.

Starting from 2018, the dual EuroSpike MELLS launcher with Rafael Spike LR ATGM will also be installed on the left side of the Puma tower, which will hit tanks at distances up to 4 km.

Puma weighs 31,45 tons in its basic configuration, designated Protection Class A, which makes it possible to transport the vehicle with the heavy Airbus A400M transport aircraft currently in service with the German Air Force. The Protection Class C kit, easily installed by Puma crewmen, adds 9 tons to the vehicle’s mass and consists of additional turret armor plates, armor plates for most of the roof and side panels covering most of the sides. This kit is a combination of compositional armor and dynamic protection units.

In order to increase survivability in the event of a mine explosion or improvised explosive device (IED), three crew members are placed on the Autoflug's Suspended Dynamic Seat, while the troopers sit on the side Protection Seat of the same company. The level of survivability of the Puma is further increased in the case of the installation of the MUltifunctional Self-protection System (MUSS) from Airbus Defense & Space.

Airbus DS Optronics supplies the PERI-RTW 360 ° Panoramic Sight and the WAO EO aiming system; Each system includes an Attica thermal imager, a laser range finder and a daytime CCD camera. Puma is the first German combat vehicle, created from the very beginning with the integration with the system of the future soldier Rheinmetall IdZ-ES, into which every soldier of the troop compartment will be equipped.

Since the army needs experience in operating the Puma machine, it is quite possible to decide on additional options that will go into service with the motorized infantry battalions. A representative of PSM recognizes that the export potential of the vehicle may increase if the family of vehicles expands, including the armored personnel carrier, reconnaissance commander, evacuation, sanitary and fire support vehicles with a larger caliber gun.

In a couple

In the German army, Puma will work in conjunction with the multi-purpose armored personnel carrier Boxer 8x8, which is manufactured by ARTEC (Armored Technology), also a joint venture of Rheinmetall (64%) and KMW (36%). Initially, three countries started the project in 1998, but France came out of it in 1999 to implement its own project for wheeled infantry fighting vehicles, and in July, the UK also came out of 2003, because at that time the British army wanted to have a car light enough to be transported by plane -130 Hercules.

In 2001, the Netherlands joined the project and three years later they signed a contract with Germany for 472 machines in nine different versions.

The concept of the project lies in the fact that various functional modules are installed on the common chassis of the Boxer Drive Module, consisting of the chassis, the power plant and the driver's workplace. The platform in the wheel configuration 8x8 has a mass of 33 tons, it is larger than most modern machines and therefore was chosen by ARTEC because it has increased mobility compared to the configuration 6x6, carrying capacity 8 tons and internal volume 14 м3.

ARTEC claims that Boxer has the highest level of protection compared to any machine in its class. Circular protection from the fire of large-caliber machine guns, medium-caliber guns, small caliber bombs and shell fragments corresponds to the Level 4 STANAG 4569, rising to the Level 5 in a frontal arc; also high level of protection (Level 4a) from mines and IEDs. In order to meet customer requirements, additional passive and dynamic protection systems can be installed.

The German version of the BTR has a crew of three people - the driver, the commander and the gunner, eight paratroopers sit facing each other on suspended energy-absorbing seats. Most German cars are equipped with a KMW FLW-200 remotely controlled combat module (CCD), while Dutch Boxer machines are equipped with a Kongsberg Protector M151 CCD. Both modules can accept an 7.62-mm machine gun, a 12,7-mm machine gun or an 40-mm automatic grenade launcher.

Along with ten driving instruction machines, the initial order for the 272 Boxer includes 135 BTR, 65 control centers and 72 sanitary. From the middle of the 2011 of the year to the end of the combat mission in 2014, the army deployed 38 BTR Boxer, command and control stations and ambulances in Afghanistan.




In accordance with the Dutch contract, GDELS-Mowag launched the production of 309 new Piranha 5 machines with the uninhabited Kongsberg MCRWS tower.

Subsequent contract

December 18 2015 Berlin issued a contract worth 476 million euros for another Boxer 131 machine with a delivery date of 2016-2020 years. All new vehicles will be in the configuration of the BTR and according to the army, these supplies will meet the needs of the infantry in the Boxer, although the army as a whole has a need for 600 platforms. KMW will make 95 additional Boxer machines, and Rheinmetall the remaining 36 units.

Recognizing that the rapid reaction forces need to have a high level of mobility in the theater of operations, the German army is considering Boxer armored vehicles for these tasks, some of which will be equipped with the RCT-30 turret from the Puma BMP.

The Dutch Army ordered five Boxer 200 machines: 92 engineering and logistical support for GNPR (Geniegroep); 52 sanitary; 36 command and staff; 12 freight conveyors; and eight driving instruction machines. These machines, as well as sanitary and command versions have already been delivered or are being delivered. In March, the first cargo variant was handed over to 2016; under the protection of armor, it can transport up to 2,5 tons of various equipment and supplies. Deliveries of the Dutch army on schedule will last until 2018 year.

11 December 2015 was announced by the Lithuanian Ministry of Defense that after evaluating the ten applicants' proposals, it had selected a Boxer machine for the Lithuanian infantry combat vehicle program. According to the latest data from the Lithuanian Ministry of Defense, at least 88 machines will be purchased, the mass production of which will begin in 2017 year. Initially, the Lithuanian Ministry of Defense chose the Boxer option with an uninhabited KMW RCT-2015 turret with an 30-mm Rheinmetall MK 30-30 / ABM automatic cannon (this tower is installed on new German BMP Puma) and Israeli Spike ATKM missiles. But at the beginning of 2, the Lithuanians found this option too expensive, and requested the installation of a Samson Mk 2016 combat module from the Israeli company Rafael on the Boxer with an ATN Orbital Bushmaster Mk 2 ATN gun and an Spike ATKM launcher. Contract signing can take place as early as July 30.

The Lithuanian contract, if signed, will increase the number of Boxer sold to 691 machines. For the Land 400 Phase 2 project of the Australian Army, which procures the purchase of 225 combat reconnaissance vehicles, Rheinmetall also offers the Boxer platform, equipped with a two-seat Lance tower with an 30-mm cannon.

From caterpillar to wheel

In March, the French army received its latest 2015 BMX VBCI (Véhicule Blindé Combat d'Infanterie) developed by Nexter to replace the tracked AMX-630P after Paris left the Boxer project in March. The army immediately agreed on the 10x8 configuration so that the new vehicle could operate in the same battle formations with Leclerc tanks. The French army received a 8 BMP VCI with a single Dragar tower with an 520-mm cannon and 25 VCP commander vehicles with an anti-aircraft defense system. A modular set of armor steel and titanium is installed on the aluminum case to increase the level of protection.

Since 2012, the entire fleet of VBCI armored vehicles is being upgraded to work with the digital equipment of the FELIN V1 soldier. Machines are currently being upgraded to a new standard, with the weight increasing to 32 tons, and the payload capacity to 3 tons. VBCI, which is in service with 8 infantry regiments, has been well tested in the real conditions of Afghanistan, the Central African Republic, Lebanon and Mali.

In September, at the DSEI exhibition, 2015, Nexter introduced a new version of the VBCI-2, which it developed on its own initiative. The new all-welded body of armored aluminum with a raised roof allowed to increase the internal volume. The total weight of the machine was approximately 32 tons, including 13 tons of payload.

The VBCI-2 was equipped with a Nexter T40 twin turret with a stabilized weapon system with CTA telescopic CTAS (Cased Telescoped Armament System) telescopic munitions, as well as Kongsberg DBMS. On the sides of the tower can be installed launchers of Javelin missiles manufactured by Raytheon / Lockheed Martin or promising MMP (Missile Moyenne Porte) missiles from MBDA. In the version with this tower, the VBCI-40 has a crew of three people; in the aft compartment of the 2, the infantrymen are placed on explosion-absorbing seats. At the request of the customer can be installed other towers.

The VBCI-2 modular booking kit provides an increased level of survivability, including ballistic protection up to 5 Level in accordance with STANAG 4569 and mine protection / VCA protection up to 4a Level / b. A video camera system is installed, the machine can be equipped with an active protection complex. A more powerful Volvo engine, a more powerful suspension and larger diameter wheels significantly improve the driving characteristics of the new car.

Nexter offers the full VBCI-2 family, including the BTR, a fire support vehicle equipped with 105 mm caliber weapons, a mortar set-up, an anti-tank complex, a commander machine, and a sanitary version.

Digital debutants

On December 5, 2014, French Minister of Defense Jean-Yves Ledrian announced that the consortium, which included Nexter, Renault Trucks Defense and Thales Communications & Security, would be awarded a contract for the development and production of the VBMR multipurpose armored vehicle (Vеhicule Blindе Multi-Roles ) 6x6 and an armored reconnaissance vehicle EBRC (Engin Blindе de Reconnaissance et de Combat) 6x6. These two platforms will be created as part of the French army's digital project Scorpion.

The consortium will build a Griffon 1722 (VBMR) machine to replace the Renault VAB (Véhicule de l'avant blindé) 4x4 Army armored personnel carriers, which are in service with the French 1972 40. The first Griffon machines can be delivered in the 2018 year, and according to plans the last 780 machine will be delivered by the 2025 year.

The standard version of the mass 24,5 tons will be an armored personnel carrier capable of carrying a crew of three people and eight people landing. Other options include ambulance, command and artillery observers. A GBM equipped with an 7,62-mm or 12,7-mm machine gun or an 40-mm grenade launcher will be mounted on the Griffon machine. A modular booking kit will provide protection in accordance with the STANAG 4 4569 Level.




Perspective French armored car Griffon. The top two photos at Eurosatoty 2016

In accordance with the current plans, the army will get 248 6-mm self-propelled artillery systems The first machines are scheduled to be delivered in the 6 year.

A double turret, armed with a CTAS 40-mm gun, a 7,62-mm machine gun and MMP anti-tank launchers with a range of 4000 meters, which are currently being developed, will be installed on the armored vehicle. Jaguar protection will be provided by reservations corresponding to the 4 STANAG 4569 Level, a laser warning system, a missile launch detection system, and a radar and infrared jamming system.



Perspective French armored car Jaguar

Fish without water

General Dynamics European Land Systems – Mowag (GDELS-Mowag) has launched production of a Piranha 5 8x8 machine after receiving a contract from Denmark worth 4,5 billion Danish kroner on 309 machines; This number may increase to 450 machines when all options are exercised.

The Piranha 5 was chosen to replace the tracked APCs M113 Danish army, where it will act in the same battle formations with 45 tracked BMP CV9035 MkIII production BAE Systems Hagglunds, bought in 2005 year and 113 wheel Piranha III, acquired three parties in 2000, 2003 and 2004 years.

The choice of Piranha was followed by extensive testing of three tracked vehicles - the CV90 Armadillo from BAE Systems Haglunds, PMMC G5 from FFG and ASCOD 2 from GDELS-Santa Barbara Sistemas, and two wheeled vehicles - VBCI 8XNNXX and Piranha 85 and Piranha XNUMX-Piranha XisNumX and Piranha XiNXX.

A representative of GDELS-Mowag is confident that the Piranha 5 will repeat the success of previous generations of Piranha machines and its modifications to the LAV production of General Dynamics Land Systems (GDLS) - Canada. Since 1972, more than 11500 machines of the Piranha / LAV series have been manufactured and with each new generation they have become more and more efficient.

The new machine Piranha 5 compared to the previous version increased mobility, protection and payload. With a base weight of 18 tons, the typical Piranha 5 machine in the BMP variant will have a total weight of 30 tons, while its design allows a further increase in weight to 33 tons. The crew of the Piranha 5 in the BTR version consists of the driver, the commander and the gunner; in the troop compartment they can accommodate up to 10 infantrymen. GDELS-Mowag will promote the Piranha 5 along with the 22-ton Piranha 3 and the 27-ton Piranha 3 +.




Nexter has developed a VBCI-2 version for export

Weapons options

The company demonstrated Piranha 5 with various turrets, starting with the uninhabited Kongsberg MCRWS turret armed with Orbital ATK 30-mm MK44 Bushmaster turret with 7,62-mm coaxial machine gun and SDM Protector with 12,7-mm machine gun on the roof of the tower. Piranha 5, equipped with a double tower Lance from Rheinmetall, was proposed for the project of the Canadian army on the melee car even before it was closed.

The machine also installed the latest remote-controlled tower Rafael Samson Mk II with a gun MK44 Bushmaster. At IDEX 2015, the company unveiled a version of the Desert Piranha 5, equipped with the CMI Defense Cockerill 3000 twin tower, which can take on various weapons, ranging from the 25-mm cannon to the 105-mm rifled tank gun.

The basic all-welded Piranha 5 case is made of armor steel, with a modular kit that can be customized for a specific customer. Customers can define other protection systems, such as the RUAG Defense SidePRO-LASSO Light Armor System against Shaped Ordnance cumulative projectiles. A new internal mine bottom has been installed, and everyone in the car is placed on explosion-proof seats. GDELS-Mowag showed the Piranha 5, equipped with the Saab LEDS-150 active protection system.

Denmark will be armed with six options for the Piranha: an armored personnel carrier, a command and control vehicle, an engineering vehicle, an ambulance and a repair vehicle. The army’s statement says that larger wheels, high ground clearance and the fourth axle drive allow the Piranha V to move faster on all types of terrain (usually 15-25%) compared to the tracked M113 BTR, which it will replace.

The statement also emphasized that “Piranha IIIC is an analog machine, whereas Piranha 5 was created from the very beginning as a digital platform. This ensures good opportunities for automatic configuration of all new digital systems that will appear on the market in the future. ”

The Danish army will receive the first vehicles in the 2018 year, which will allow to start training, and next year they will be deployed in operating units. All vehicles must be delivered on schedule for the 2023 year.

With the goal of starting an expanded test program, Spain ordered four versions of the Piranha 5 8x8 machine with delivery scheduled for the end of 2017. The Spanish army wants to get 300-400 wheeled combat vehicles VCR (Vehiculo de Combate sobre Ruedas) in order to replace its BMR-600 6xXNNXX BMP. Spanish cars Piranha 6 will be manufactured at the local plant of GDELS-Santa Barbara Sistemas.

Ajax achievements

The Spanish company is also currently working on the Ajax tracked reconnaissance vehicle. This is the only new armored vehicle, the development of which is currently underway for the British army. Following a competitive evaluation in July 2010, GDLS-UK received a contract worth 500 million pounds from the British Department of Defense to develop seven prototypes of the Scout Specialist Vehicle, which is a modified version of the ASCOD BMP. Seven prototype machines include the Common Base Platform (CBP) common platform, three Ajax reconnaissance vehicles and one repair option for Apollo, Atlas evacuation and Ares intelligence support.




New British car Ajax. Below is a prototype of the second major modification - the PMRS armored personnel carrier

In September, 2014, the company GDLS-UK received a contract worth 3,5 billion pounds for the supply of 589 machines in the period from 2017 to 2026 year. The project provides for the installation of 40-mm guns CTAS. In April, 2016, the company successfully completed the firing tests of the Ajax machine in preparation for the official test program scheduled for the end of this year.

According to a strategic review released by the British government in November 2015, the British army will undergo a so-called transformation, according to which two medium assault brigades will be formed, two motorized infantry battalions each, which will receive the MIV (Mechanized Infantry Vehicle) wheeled vehicle. It is expected that the candidacies of European platforms will be offered: Nexter VBCI, ARTEC Boxer and Armored Modular Vehicle of the Finnish company Patria.

GDLS says it will offer the Stryker 8x8 and Canadian LAV III (in the latest LAV 6.0 configuration), both with double V-shaped hulls. This will be the third attempt by the British Army to adopt an armored personnel carrier in the 8x8 configuration in the last 15 years, and the desperate army command hopes that the MIV project will finally become successful.


European programs on armored combat vehicles

Materials used:
www.rheinmetall-defence.com
www.artec-boxer.com
www.nexter-group.fr
www.gdls.com
www.baesystems.com
www.lockheedmartin.com
www.wikipedia.org
en.wikipedia.org
Author:
127 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Wolka
    Wolka 21 July 2016 06: 19
    +6
    outwardly nothing new, and in general I am confused by the high silhouette of these armored monsters, especially wheeled, and the upper hemisphere is not protected at all, good targets for flying attack aircraft
    1. Malkor
      Malkor 21 July 2016 08: 29
      +3
      Boxer in the photo on the back - such a barn !!! Just huge. It’s impossible to miss, how to hide such a machine on the battlefield?
    2. Forest
      Forest 21 July 2016 09: 41
      +5
      When using precision weapons, the difference in 20-30 cm will not solve anything. And in terms of protection, these infantry fighting vehicles and armored personnel carriers are much higher than our even promising models.
      1. Malkor
        Malkor 21 July 2016 14: 59
        +1
        Rather, the difference is a meter, it is higher than our tank. Have you tried firing from your WTO you're talking about? Size matters.
        1. Come on
          Come on 21 July 2016 15: 42
          0
          What is the difference in a meter? :) Why are you looking for a wheeled armored personnel carrier, which due to large wheels, suspensions and measures to protect against mines and IEDs is compared to a tank? :) Do you think that a well-protected car is bigger than a badly protected one, but more low will be easier to destroy?
        2. Forest
          Forest 21 July 2016 21: 33
          +1
          When at 5-6 km ATGM of the 2 generation hits the window, and the 3-generation in general 95% has a defeat of the captured target, then even the meter does not matter, especially since the Boxer’s height is 2,4 m, which is only 20 cm above the cache .
          1. cast iron
            cast iron 23 October 2016 23: 12
            0
            When the low silhouette can be hidden behind the parapet and the folds of the terrain and the green, then no ATGM will go anywhere in any window))) Your comparison of simple digital numbers is fundamentally wrong. It is necessary to compare the projection area. And here a huge advantage over Soviet tanks.
      2. Bogdarin
        Bogdarin 21 July 2016 18: 47
        +1
        Where did you get this from? 20-30 cm does not solve, but how is the lag of even those same Kurgan, and even more so the T-15 in terms of protection determined? From the site "BLA-BLA-BLA"?
      3. Operator
        Operator 21 July 2016 21: 20
        +2
        60-ton T-15 "Barberry" with KAZ inserts various "Pumas" and other Euro-shushers up to the very tomatoes.
        1. Simple
          Simple 22 July 2016 02: 59
          +5
          Quote: Operator
          60-ton T-15 "Barberry" with KAZ inserts various "Pumas" and other Euro-shushers up to the very tomatoes.

          fool
          I would like to see "60-ton T-15" Barberry "" in the army.
          It is possible without KAZ!
          Schützenpanzer Puma (we will keep silent about the "Euroshusher" for decency) from Projekt System & Management GmbH (PSM) (JV rauss-Maffei Wegmann (KMW) and Rheinmetall Defense) plan only for Germany = 410 vehicles (more than 60 delivered)
          and how they "can supply when needed" is known
          Well, there are still about 1170 pieces of Stridsfordon 90 (Combat Vehicle 90, combat vehicle Strf-90 / 40)

          .
          "Operators" are not in the house?
          "inserts" from personal experience?
          ==========================================
          If you combine the US + 24 main countries from the EU + Norway and Switzerland + Bosnia, then 10911 tanks, 29718 units of armored personnel carriers, 12769 units of BMP and BMD and 7135 reconnaissance vehicles will be released.
          How many Russia? Total 20550 tanks, of which 2500 is in service and 18.5 thousand in warehouses! New T-90 from Russia over 550 units. Then 15700 BTR (9700 in service), 15860 BMP and BMD (7360 in service) and 2200 reconnaissance vehicles.

          HOW MUCH ON THE GO?

          1. Operator
            Operator 22 July 2016 09: 58
            +2
            Ah, here’s the second minuser drew himself - an idolater of the Western wunderwaffles.

            Well, they jumped off the topic: a comparison of the performance characteristics of the new Russian and Western infantry fighting vehicles - well, very uncomfortable, I understand.

            They pulled on the number of armored vehicles (they did not forget to include such superpowers as Switzerland and Bosnia in the standings) and here they also shaved off to the fullest - Russia had more tanks than North America with all European coders.

            What a bummer for a miner, but nothing: as always, they wiped themselves off and remembered the indicator "on the go", but really - how many "on the go" did NATA have? bully
            1. mav1971
              mav1971 21 December 2016 22: 54
              +2
              Quote: Operator
              Ah, here’s the second minuser drew himself - an idolater of the Western wunderwaffles.

              Well, they jumped off the topic: a comparison of the performance characteristics of the new Russian and Western infantry fighting vehicles - well, very uncomfortable, I understand.


              Listen, reptiloid with an alternative universe!
              Someday you will stop comparing living products (already delivered to the troops and adopted for service) with incomprehensible "Wishlist" (which is still being tested at factory testing grounds and factory testers, whose engine has not even been put into production, and in general it is not known which engine will be)
              Kurgan in combat units, adopted for service, will not be seen for at least 5 years.
              And you already compare and beat all the enemies!
              You beat them with the power of your thoughts chtoli?
              Fart will not tear?

              When will you begin to think with your head about the enemy?
              1. mav1971
                mav1971 21 December 2016 23: 34
                0
                Following up. (for some reason, the correction did not work).

                Barbarisk in combat units earlier than 2018, and even 2019 of the year - we also will not see.
                The number of produced may be less than 500 pcs according to plan.
                And fso.
                For dear as Armata! And maybe it will be more expensive.

                Besides.
                You easily and naturally simulate the battle between the German and Russian infantry fighting vehicles.
                Not wanting to realize that in such a clash they can meet only in the main planned task.
                Namely MBT support.
                And who, in such a situation, will conduct "fire impact" on the enemy?
                30-mm bullets BMP (that the Germans that ours) ???
                Or can still long-range 120 and 125mm tank guns?
                And for their shells do not care - heavy BMP or light - direct hit - exit from battle 100% is guaranteed.
                Only tanks will hit.
                And none of the BMPs to reach "friend-to-friend" may not have a chance at all.
                From the word "nothing".
                You can forget about equipping Barberry with Baikal - he will not be there.
          2. venik
            venik 22 July 2016 17: 32
            -1
            Quote: Just
            If you combine the United States + 24 major countries from the EU + Norway and Switzerland + Bosnia


            No, well it certainly touches !! Especially - Bosnia !!! Without Bosnia, NATO - well, NO! That's interesting, but how did Switzerland get here? The country is purely NEUTRAL, does not participate in any blocs (by the way - even does not belong to the EU), it is not going to fight with anyone, against anyone !!!
            With this approach, it’s easier to add the rest of the world here from China to the Tonga Islands (though I’m not sure if the latter have tanks?).
            1. Simple
              Simple 22 July 2016 22: 37
              +1
              Quote: venik
              No, well it certainly touches !!

              Well, go to the bathhouse with a broom, it relaxes
              Quote: venik
              Especially - Bosnia !!!

              And that Bosnia will take neutrality or take our side?
              Quote: venik
              But how did Switzerland get here?

              Europe.
              =======================
              Are we considering theater of war Europe? Or ? can you fantasize about Africa fool
              ===========================
              She WAS “purely neutral”.
              If you don’t know there, then from 1996 (? - / +) the air defense of Switzerland from 17: 00 to 10: 00 is carried by NATO (French, Italians, Germans), Switzerland arms NATO with enthusiasm (and receives).
              There is a single standard with the NATO armed forces, joint exercises. For us, they will not be tonon *
              Quote: venik
              By the way - even in the EU - not included)

              What are you talking about? Likbez can be read to deer in Ukraine, I should not.
              She is part of AELE / EFTA.
              Tell me more about Schengen, show off

              and about "decoupling" CHF from the euro 2 years ago, almost
              Quote: venik
              With this approach, it’s easier to add the rest of the world here from China to the islands of Tonga

              China is generally not worth mentioning, the fart will break.
              About Tongo - not in the know? What is it that stuck you in Tongo?
              "Glory in Honduras"? / Broom should be used more often, broom!
              1. Philip Staros
                Philip Staros 22 July 2016 22: 50
                +2
                And we will add the Turkish army there (which alone covers the number of the rest of the Euro-party) ... and Greece ...
                No, they told you right - plus all at once.
                We, it is clear to hell, will not have any allies at all, even situational ones? And all the "nats" will get up and one day "go to war"?
                In other matters, the number still came out "oh".
                1. Simple
                  Simple 23 July 2016 13: 27
                  0
                  "And Greece"?
                  No need to write - if not read.
                  Look carefully at the scoreboard: Greece is there (in the scoreboard)
                  And everything that Turkey has is difficult to add to the European theater.
                  Get up / not get up = xs.
                  I brought figures facts- What is available.
                  There is something to bring in a rebuttal-cheat
              2. venik
                venik 25 July 2016 11: 43
                +1
                Quote: Just
                Well, go to the bathhouse with a broom, it relaxes


                On the contrary - STRESSES (u-fools to whip)


                Quote: Just
                If you don’t know there, then from 1996 (? - / +) Swiss air defense from 17:00 to 10:00 has been carried out by NATO (French, Italians, Germans),


                And who is responsible for the sky of Switzerland from 10.00 to 17.00 ??

                Quote: Just
                What are you talking about? It’s possible to read educational program for deer in Ukraine, I don’t have to. It is included in AELE / EFTA.


                And, what do you think, a free trade zone - does this mean MEMBERSHIP in the EU ???


                Quote: Just
                Most often you need to use a broom, a broom!


                Well, so I also use it! Not only to take a steam bath, or sweep away the muz, but also so that Just a ham stigma JUST on a patch HOW SHOULD "tinker" !!!
          3. Philip Staros
            Philip Staros 22 July 2016 21: 57
            +1
            It should be noted that here are described machines that are either still being developed at all, or are only just beginning to enter the troops = AGEs of Kurgan and Armat.
            Classmates by weight Kurgan, and Puma with "body kit" - quite and Armata T-15.
      4. venik
        venik 22 July 2016 17: 18
        +1
        Quote: Forest
        And in terms of protection, these infantry fighting vehicles and armored personnel carriers are much higher than our even promising models


        Tell me, do you have data on the protection of "Boomerang", "Atom", Kurganets "," Armata "(BMP-T-15) ??? Do not accidentally prompt ??? If you do not have such data - then excuse me - something like that the statement is perceived as "blah-blah-blah" (in short - a verbal telp !!!)!
        1. psiho117
          psiho117 23 July 2016 03: 25
          +1
          Quote: venik

          Tell me, do you have data on the protection of "Boomerang", "Atom", Kurganets "," Armata "(BMP-T-15) ??? Do not accidentally tell me ??? If you do not have such data - then excuse me - something like that the statement is perceived as "blah blah blah"

          we do not have data on the protection of our vehicles, but there is data on their firepower - all promising vehicles switched to 40mm CTAS and 40mm Bofors plus Spayki / Javelins, or generally promising ATGMs.
          and this very Seriously. And I don’t need blah blah about KAZ - I haven’t seen it yet on any production car, and how it will be from launch vehicles, oriented exclusively forward, reflect the attacks from the sides, or, God forbid from above - I can’t imagine.
          1. venik
            venik 25 July 2016 14: 31
            0
            Quote: psiho117
            And I don’t need blah blah about KAZ - I haven’t seen it yet on any production car


            Well, during the service I didn’t see a single rocket, the creation of which our laboratory (as it turned out much later) had a direct relationship ... Do you think there were none ?? There were !!! And with might and main they entered service not only in the USSR, but also in the VD countries!

            PS By the way, they are still in service with many countries and are considered ONE OF THE BEST !!
        2. Forest
          Forest 23 July 2016 10: 51
          0
          There will be no 30-40 data years yet, but no one has forbidden calculating in comparison with modern samples. And to understand how one of the lightest modern tanks has the LARGEST size of all MBTs that have ever been - then the armor is smeared with a thin layer. T-90MS, in which the reserved volume is almost 2 times smaller, has a similar mass, which means they will also reduce weight due to armor.
          By Kurganets - watch the video on the assembly of the BMP from TV Star. The thickness of the armor there is something not visible, solid tin.
      5. venik
        venik 22 July 2016 17: 18
        +1
        Quote: Forest
        And in terms of protection, these infantry fighting vehicles and armored personnel carriers are much higher than our even promising models


        Tell me, do you have data on the protection of "Boomerang", "Atom", Kurganets "," Armata "(BMP-T-15) ??? Do not accidentally prompt ??? If you do not have such data - then excuse me - something like that the statement is perceived as "blah-blah-blah" (in short - a verbal telp !!!)!
      6. cast iron
        cast iron 23 October 2016 23: 09
        +1
        What are you? And are there many "high-precision weapons" in the motorized rifle company? ))))) I'll tell you more! For 152mm artillery OFS, the size of the target is very important - the larger the target, the greater the number of fragments of the exploded shell will pierce it through and through like a colander.
  2. Come on
    Come on 21 July 2016 06: 24
    +1
    Alex Alekseev, as always interesting.
  3. igordok
    igordok 21 July 2016 06: 46
    0
    Thank you. Interesting.
    Please tell me why you need a casing for the trunk?
    To protect against damage - weak, and why holes.
    For cooling - on the contrary, it will interfere.
    As a stealth element for protection against IR detection, I also doubt it.
    Most likely for the sake of appearance, as in science fiction films, something would cut money.
    1. kugelblitz
      kugelblitz 21 July 2016 07: 25
      +5
      Quote: igordok
      Please tell me why you need a casing for the trunk?

      As heard, this thermal insulation to prevent it from bending from uneven heating.
      1. alpamys
        alpamys 21 July 2016 08: 02
        +3
        Quote: kugelblitz
        Quote: igordok
        Please tell me why you need a casing for the trunk?

        As heard, this thermal insulation to prevent it from bending from uneven heating.

        when shooting, the barrel vibrates less, increasing accuracy.
        1. igordok
          igordok 21 July 2016 09: 17
          +3
          Quote: alpamys
          when shooting, the barrel vibrates less, increasing accuracy.

          Those. something like a stiff triangle?
          1. alpamys
            alpamys 21 July 2016 09: 47
            +1
            Quote: igordok
            stiffness triangle

            yes, even in Kalash with its barrel, slow motion is visible when the barrel is oscillating, while in the long-term BMP barrel they were much stronger until they put the casing.
            1. kugelblitz
              kugelblitz 21 July 2016 17: 06
              +3
              Quote: alpamys
              long-term trunk BMP they were much stronger until they put the casing

              This is usually called not a casing, but a farm. The casing is usually in tank guns for thermal insulation.
        2. Simple
          Simple 22 July 2016 03: 08
          0
          Quote: alpamys
          when shooting, the barrel vibrates less, increasing accuracy.

          Vibrates?
          Less?
          fool

          Impact thermal bending on the accuracy of firing of long-barrel weapon systems began to be studied in the middle of the last century. The nature of this phenomenon is simple. The sun, wind, rain, thermal processes of the shot, the thickness of the barrel wall, associated with manufacturing errors, lead to the fact that the gun barrel is constantly heated on one side more than the other. The temperature difference causes it to bend.
          None of the listed thermal effects is constant, therefore the picture of the temperature field is constantly changing and the barrel of the gun, like a tree trunk, is in constant motion, not only from the wind, but from thermal deformation.
          As a result, the projectile angle, even under normal conditions for us, can change quite significantly. At the same time, some causes of different heating affect the first shot, others - on subsequent ones.
          So, for example, if the summer European sun shines on the barrel of a tank (anti-tank) gun during the day for an hour, then when firing at a distance of 1.500 m, the points of impact of the first shells will go down-to-side relative to the aiming point at 1-1,7 m. Shooting from the same gun during a light drizzle will cause the points of impact of the third and fourth shells to deviate up and to the side by 1,6-2,5 meters. For reference: in central Europe, on average 77 days of the year, precipitation occurs.
          Abroad, they were the first to understand the danger of the phenomenon of thermal bending and urgently set about finding ways to eliminate it. The solution was found quite quickly, and soon they began to install heat-shielding casings on the trunks - TZK (English - thermal sleeve) They should have exclude any environmental impact leading to thermal bending of the barrel, and thus provide gun battle stability.


          in the photo you can clearly see "it still dries up the vibration"
    2. Malkor
      Malkor 21 July 2016 08: 32
      +7
      The casing protects against environmental influences. The barrel heats up during shooting. If there is precipitation, wind or strong sun, etc. the barrel will be unevenly cooled and the curvature will not heat up; the calculated curvature will fall.
      1. Come on
        Come on 21 July 2016 14: 23
        +1
        These are measures to reduce vibration and increase accuracy. Actually, this is a ship’s cannon and in a ship’s version, the rate of fire is up to 800 V / m and another measure to increase accuracy is to reduce the rate of fire by 200 V / m. In article 2, a photo of Puma, a prototype with 5 rollers and a gun without a casing and below a photo of Puma is already the one that goes to the troops, with ext. skating rink, more powerful dviglom, trunk casing.
        1. Simple
          Simple 22 July 2016 03: 16
          -2
          Quote: Yeah, well.
          These are measures to reduce vibration and increase accuracy.

          another "vibrating"!

          Q: Are you familiar with the thermal sleeve concept?


          and 127 / 64 LW Vulcano naval gun system Oto Melara?

          so what vibration, already horror. No

          or onOTO MELARA 76mm STRALES SUPER RAPIDO


          I give a hint: cooling with overboard water is somewhat different than the TS!
          Yes, and the LENGTH of the BAR is the same ...
  4. grau
    grau 21 July 2016 07: 18
    -3
    ** The prehistoric year of the development of 1960 is nothing new
  5. grau
    grau 21 July 2016 07: 21
    +1
    This is the same as giving out 60 for a new model
  6. Gray brother
    Gray brother 21 July 2016 07: 37
    14
    What is dumb on the list of the Ukrainian BMP "Azovets"? Adzhe tse naipuzhnіsha BMP in svіtі, and Ukraine is tse European power. I won't let you in! I will go to the UN, Haas Tribunal and Sportloto.
    1. venik
      venik 21 July 2016 09: 11
      +4
      Ta ni, kume! Well, no BMP! All the first one at the Svitі INOVATSIIJNYY tank !!!
      1. Mother CheeseEarth
        Mother CheeseEarth 21 July 2016 12: 30
        0
        Quote: venik
        Gray brother

        Quote: venik
        venik

        Lord Europeans, do not disgrace, use the Latin alphabet! hi
        1. venik
          venik 21 July 2016 14: 29
          13
          Quote: Mother CheeseEarth
          Lord Europeans, do not disgrace, use the Latin alphabet!


          I beg your pardon, but in what language was it written (by the way, the Gray brother is a very witty man!) And answered so! By the way - the same Cyrillic only: "s" is written as "and", "and" - as "i", "e" - as "e", well, "e" - as an inverted "e" (є). The rest is all the same!

          Since not everyone knows "mov" - I translate:
          =
          Gray brother:
          "Why is the Ukrainian BMP Azovets not on the list? Or is it not the most powerful BMP in the world, and Ukraine is not a European power. I will not leave that so! I will complain to the UN, the Hague Tribunal and Sportloto."

          =
          Answer (venik) ^
          Yes, no godfather (respectful treatment accepted in Ukraine)! This is not a BMP! This is the FIRST INNOVATION tank in the world !!!

          PS Just don't ask what an "innovative tank" is! I dont know!!! Probably the name was invented together with this "miracle of nature"!

          PPS Lord, after all, when you used to develop planes and missiles and ships ... Alas - all this is in the PAST!
          Truly: "The twilight of reason - give birth to MONSTERS !!!"
  7. alpamys
    alpamys 21 July 2016 08: 00
    -1
    to the new Puma machine, which the manufacturer describes as "the most powerful BMP in the world."

    Yab added, which has no analogues in the world. good
    1. venik
      venik 21 July 2016 09: 05
      +5
      Quote: alpamys
      Yab added, which has no analogues in the world


      Brrr !! What I don't like is the phrase "has no analogues"! This statement applies ONLY to the FIRST examples of anything in the world. Well, there is the world's first tank or the world's first BMP. In all other cases, the machine (or system) may not have analogues only in some SEPARATE parameters !!
      If you are saying so, then be so kind as to specify in which parameters Puma has no analogues?
      - for security?
      - in speed?
      - by maneuverability?
      - on the cross?
      - by the ability to swim?
      - by capacity?
      - by firepower?
      1. Forest
        Forest 21 July 2016 09: 52
        0
        1) Protection - in the forehead with a set of additional armor holds from 500 m BOPS up to 50 mm and RPG-7, and this is up to 250 and 600 mm homogenes against kinetic and cumulative ammunition. Board and feed are protected from KPVT. 10 kg of TNT can withstand under the explosion.
        2) Mobility - if our 14-ton BMP-2 21,4 hp / t, then the 43-ton Puma 25,3 hp / t. I think further comments are unnecessary.
        3) The armament is excellent - the 30-mm MK-30 is generally beyond comparison with the trash that is installed on our infantry fighting vehicles and armored personnel carriers, including the T-15 and Kurganets-25. Plus ATGM Spike 3 generation. The machine gun is weak, of course, 5,56, but it is still not the main weapon.
        1. Skubudu
          Skubudu 21 July 2016 10: 14
          +5
          Quote: Forest
          1) Protection - in the forehead with a set of additional armor holds from 500 m BOPS up to 50 mm and RPG-7, and this is up to 250 and 600 mm homogenes against kinetic and cumulative ammunition. Board and feed are protected from KPVT. 10 kg of TNT can withstand under the explosion.
          2) Mobility - if our 14-ton BMP-2 21,4 hp / t, then the 43-ton Puma 25,3 hp / t. I think further comments are unnecessary.
          3) The armament is excellent - the 30-mm MK-30 is generally beyond comparison with the trash that is installed on our infantry fighting vehicles and armored personnel carriers, including the T-15 and Kurganets-25. Plus ATGM Spike 3 generation. The machine gun is weak, of course, 5,56, but it is still not the main weapon.

          Why do you compare the 43-ton Puma with the BMP-2?
          Compare with the T-15 heavy BMP comparable in price and weight. This is objective.
          1. Forest
            Forest 21 July 2016 12: 46
            -7
            Here it is quite comparable, especially when the car in 3 is heavier and has mobility better than BMP-2. The T-15 will appear in the 18-19 years, and indeed it will have the same wretched weapons that the modern armored personnel carrier cannot destroy. Well, I don’t think that the T-15 has any decent booking - it weighs 6,4 tons more (15%), but it’s longer by 2 m, wider by a meter and above by 0,4 m. IMHO, but choosing security between Armata and even the old T-72Б - I will choose 72-ku.
            1. Skubudu
              Skubudu 21 July 2016 15: 11
              +9
              Quote: Forest
              Here it is quite comparable, especially when the car in 3 is heavier and has mobility better than BMP-2. The T-15 will appear in the 18-19 years, and indeed it will have the same wretched weapons that the modern armored personnel carrier cannot destroy. Well, I don’t think that the T-15 has any decent booking - it weighs 6,4 tons more (15%), but it’s longer by 2 m, wider by a meter and above by 0,4 m. IMHO, but choosing security between Armata and even the old T-72Б - I will choose 72-ku.

              Booking T-15 at the level of T-14, which means the maximum possible existing in the tank niche, respectively, the armor of Puma is significantly weaker than the armor of T-15.
              The mobility of the T-15 30.s. / t, the mobility of the Puma loses.
              On T-15, KAZ Afganit based on AFAR ... gives an undeniable advantage and opportunity ... on Puma and there is nothing like that near.
              Cornets, hit any existing tank in the world without KAZ.
              T-15 carries 9 paratroopers, Puma smokes again with 6 ...
              Of course Puma’s gun is good, but B.K. small
              Spike is again not a native complex but Jewish

              Rolled the bun on the road roller.
              ps about the best booking T-72 ... vidyuhi from Syria look. Probably not just all the same, Armata was built.
              1. Forest
                Forest 21 July 2016 21: 44
                -2
                Quote: Skubudu

                Booking T-15 at the level of T-14, which means the maximum possible existing in the tank niche, respectively, the armor of Puma is significantly weaker than the armor of T-15.
                The mobility of the T-15 30.s. / t, the mobility of the Puma loses.
                On T-15, KAZ Afganit based on AFAR ... gives an undeniable advantage and opportunity ... on Puma and there is nothing like that near.
                Cornets, hit any existing tank in the world without KAZ.
                T-15 carries 9 paratroopers, Puma smokes again with 6 ...
                Of course Puma’s gun is good, but B.K. small
                Spike is again not a native complex but Jewish

                Rolled the bun on the road roller.
                ps about the best booking T-72 ... vidyuhi from Syria look. Probably not just all the same, Armata was built.

                I generally do not believe that the T-14 has at least some adequate booking. Until they upload the video of the shelling, I’m even afraid to meet the ancient T-62 in battle. The largest tank in the world with almost the lowest weight, by definition, cannot be armored. There is somewhere 22 m3 of the reserved volume, for T-90AMs of the same mass in 48 t -
                12 m3. Take a ton of equipment in 25 t, 23 t is left for armor. Given the difference in booked volumes and 15% improvement in T-14 armor resistance, we get a mass of 62 t to make Armata compare with 90-com on booking.
                Not every tank will take a Cornet in the forehead - depending on the modification, the Cornet takes 1100-1500 mm, the forehead of the M1A2 SEP v2 body has about 1000 mm, Leo 2 - about 1200 against the COP. On the towers there are 1600 and 2000, respectively. But Spike attacks the roof with all the consequences. And its production is localized in Germany.
                In the West, the main infantry units for 5 people + commander. So enough.
                1. Anatoly
                  Anatoly 22 July 2016 05: 37
                  0
                  The armor on the T-14 is bulletproof and if you put a 57mm module on it, then the cougar is better not to catch the eye and at the expense of weight, it is not correct to compare the armored car with the module and a full-fledged tank, because the weight of the armored turret and the weakly protected module are incommensurable on Armata, the armor protection is concentrated on the body where the crew is. Due to the weak protection of the modules, I agree, it needs to be strengthened, otherwise any automatic push will easily turn the tank with the module into a tractor.
                  1. Forest
                    Forest 22 July 2016 09: 19
                    -3
                    It is a heavy anti-ballistic armor and should weigh a lot, and not 23-25 tons of the largest infantry fighting vehicle / tank in the world. The 57 mm gun is much worse than even the Bradley 25 mm gun. Do you even see what kind of gun it is - the ancient anti-aircraft C-60, which even the sub-calibers cannot fire due to the features of the barrel. This ZiS-2 count with the possibility of automatic fire.
                    1. Anatoly
                      Anatoly 22 July 2016 16: 43
                      0
                      Don’t goof the guy. which T-23s have 25-14 ​​tons, this is not Kurgan and who told you that trunks 60 years old will be put on the new module.
                      1. Forest
                        Forest 22 July 2016 21: 37
                        +1
                        23-25 t - this is a mass of armor. This is minus weapons, chassis, engine, tanks, crew and airborne seats, SLAs, etc. Given the reserved volume in the 22-23 m3, the lowest protection among the heavy infantry fighting vehicles and tanks of the years with the 60's comes out. We have not developed a new 57-mm gun, and therefore put the C-60 with an increased rate of fire. The nomenclature of BC remained the same. This is official data. Such a gun only scare the infantry.
                      2. Anatoly
                        Anatoly 23 July 2016 16: 34
                        0
                        Well, let's calculate according to yours, if the weight of the armor is half the weight of the tank, then Armata is 48t and Puma is 31,7t, total 24t versus 16 by almost 10t Armata is superior in reservation. Now, at the expense of the gun, even if you think this is an old anti-aircraft gun, it should already be long-range by definition, to reach the target in height, but the armor-piercing shell is a soft shell and a core made of hard alloy (depleted uranium) and that's it
                      3. Forest
                        Forest 23 July 2016 17: 15
                        +1
                        T-15 weighs 50 t, 48 at the tank, Puma in a full set of armor - 43,6 t. 32 weighs during transportation. You forget about the size you need to book - length (T-15 / Puma) 9,5 / 7,33, width 4 (with 4,8 screens) / 3,7 (with 3,9 screens), height 3,5 / 3,6. As you can see, Armata is much larger. The armor-piercing caliber projectile C-60 contains neither tungsten, nor even uranium. In the 30-ies such a projectile would cost as an artillery brigade. There is nothing newer. Although the maximum range is 12 km, it is impossible for weak OSs to fire from closed positions, and direct fire above 2-2,5 km is impossible in 95% of cases. There is no commonplace in Europe such open spaces. In Iraq, in the desert 4 km was not always found in the cross, and you see them everywhere in densely built-up Europe with rough terrain. And on 2 km C-60 takes only 44 mm. Even the BMP-2 can withstand a single hit.
                      4. Anatoly
                        Anatoly 23 July 2016 18: 59
                        +2
                        I'm tired of kneading your dregs. The weight of 48t and 317 for non-equipped cars without ammunition fuel without landing screens and other canopy, for a fully equipped Armata, the weight will go far 50 tons and for a cougar for 40 tons. The gun on the module is promising, for modern types of ammunition that have already been developed for it and the range for the gun is not just the distance but the kinetic energy of the projectile, that is, armor penetration.
                      5. Forest
                        Forest 23 July 2016 21: 16
                        +2
                        Maybe you look at least somewhere? The mass of Cougars in 32 t - WITHOUT AN OUTBOARD ARMOR. http://warinform.ru/News-view-335.html Look at the table at the end.
                        At AU-220M it is C-60, and not something promising. http://topwar.ru/10178-cnii-burevestnik-au-a-220m-i-au-220m.html
                        Ammunition for it is new - only adjusted OFS.
                        Range is not equal to penetration - the Challenger-2 can hit a target at 12 km, but penetration is inferior to Abrams, whose BOPS range is only 4 km. The same goes for kinetic energy - for 122-mm D-25Т the muzzle energy is BR-471 8 MJ, for Mango 2А46М - 7,2 MJ, but penetration is almost 6 times higher for the latter.
                  2. Cat man null
                    Cat man null 30 July 2016 21: 44
                    -1
                    Quote: Anatoly
                    armor-piercing shell is a soft shell and a core made of hard alloy (depleted uranium) and all things

                    - yah? Well, you are a specialist, you can immediately see laughing
            2. Philip Staros
              Philip Staros 22 July 2016 22: 08
              0
              Are you sure you would like to stay with a 25mm cannon versus 57mm with an adjustable projectile (for a minute ...) at a distance of four kilometers?
              1. Forest
                Forest 23 July 2016 10: 53
                0
                If in the same Puma - then completely. 57-mm OFS will not penetrate the armor.
        2. Philip Staros
          Philip Staros 22 July 2016 22: 07
          +1
          Did you go to school? Did Mary Ivanovna teach you how to extract cubic roots? Well this is so ... "about spelling."
          The main defense of modern tanks and equipment is active systems. Western machines, basically, do not have them at all. Those. it’s not worth comparing them at all.
          Towers (inhabited / uninhabited) are also worth considering.
          1. Forest
            Forest 23 July 2016 10: 59
            0
            COEP are almost everywhere (for example, Leo - MUSS, Abrams - AN / VLQ-6 MCD). All promising vehicles are equipped with KAZ. We do not have serially KAZ, KOEP is still in the 80s and showed its shortcomings even at the Greek tender. And neither KAZ nor KOEP against BOPS will be able to do anything. And the nonsense from the series "Armata will shoot down sub-calibers from a machine gun" - generally complete drug addiction - not only is the density of fire too low, it is difficult to hit a target with a diameter of 20 mm, and the speed of rotation of the installation obviously will not keep pace with the flight of the projectile. And this is just over a second per 2 km.
    2. Operator
      Operator 21 July 2016 21: 48
      -3
      You just do not drown in the snot of affection for "Puma".

      T-15 / Puma:
      Weight, tons 60 / 43
      KAZ is / is not
      Engine power hp 1500 / 1088
      Landing Man 9 / 6
      ATGM flight speed, m / s 250 / 130
      Unification with MBT is / is not
      1. Forest
        Forest 21 July 2016 23: 18
        +1
        1) T-15 weighs 50 tons, 60 we have not a single loading platform can stand it.
        2) It is not known whether KAZ is on the T-15 or not. No official data. You are so AFAR stuck T-14, although it does not fit banally there. On Puma, however, there is a MUSS COEP.
        3) For a smaller size you need to pay with something, that’s why the MTO was not delivered from Leo.
        4) I don’t understand at all what the landing in 9 people is superior to the landing in 6 people. What Germans, 3 places are always free to carry?
        5) Compare the Cornet of the 2 generation with the Spike 3 generation, and the best, in terms of flight speed - another nonsense.
        6) They have no sense in unification, and there is only one running gear. If journalists had less tryndels, it would turn out that such unification was carried out in the 30 years.
        That’s pure minus from the heart.
        1. Operator
          Operator 22 July 2016 09: 43
          +2
          Minusher, 50 tons T-15 weighs in the minimum configuration of armor protection modules, as well as "Puma" in version A weighing 31 tons.

          As for the carrying capacity of modern railway platforms, learn the materiel.

          KOEP and KAZ cut eyes on all photos of the T-15, the stub of KOEP "Cougars" must still try to see how lice are on a dog.

          Yes, yes, there is no point in unification - like "the grapes were green".
        2. venik
          venik 22 July 2016 18: 11
          +1
          Quote: Forest
          60 we have not a single loading platform can stand it.


          But do you generally know the load capacity of a standard cargo railway platform? No? So - just 60 tons !!! If you take into account that according to the rules of transportation by rail from the armored vehicles, ALL ammunition is unloaded and part of the fuel is drained, then it just comes out ...

          Quote: Forest
          4) I don’t understand what the landing of 9 people is superior to that of 6 people.


          If you sit on the couch and talk - then NOTHING! And in a real battle, 3 "extra" barrels in fact - are not EXTRAORDINARY!

          Quote: Forest
          5) Compare the Cornet of the 2 generation with the Spike 3 generation, and the best, in terms of flight speed - another nonsense.


          3rd generation ATGMs, of course, have certain advantages over 2nd generation missiles, but they are far from as unambiguous as manufacturers are trying to imagine !!! Especially - for systems mounted on armored vehicles! Here then just a large range and flight speed can play a decisive role! Who opened fire from a greater distance - a priori has an advantage. Or do you want to argue with that?
          So, get your "-" and do not be offended - you fully deserve it (and not even one!).

          PS I generally do not like "minus", but when a person speaks nonsense, and at the same time persists, forgive the finger by itself reaches for the "-" key!
          1. Forest
            Forest 22 July 2016 21: 44
            +1
            Dear, they will not load the platform to the eyeballs of 60; it will be the wild wear of the platform itself and the tracks. Yes, and the mass declared OFFICIALLY.
            Why do the 3 Germans need the extra barrel if they use the 5 fighter scheme and commander in battle? What should they do with 3 fighters if they do not fit into the charters and the rear support system?
            Spike-LR has a range of 4 km, which is enough to hit any target for the eyes. If you find a lumbago for 10 km of Cornet on the European theater, where even a tank is impossible to see, it will be simply the greatest find. Usually the visibility distance there is 2-2,5 km. The flight speed against targets that can move at most 100 km / h is not critical, especially that it does not need to be accompanied - capture-launch-defeat. Everything!
            1. Philip Staros
              Philip Staros 22 July 2016 22: 18
              +2
              The first - BEFORE FRAUD places where in OPTICS (!) It is easy to observe enemy armored vehicles at maximum range.
              You want 6 km. to go under the enemy’s sight?

              Cornet D does not require operator support - all he needs is DIRECT VISIBILITY TO THE GOAL during the flight. An operator can be hired by anything. On foot, this can be considered ka minus. But BMP in any case does not hide in the ditch. Yes, and why, if the enemy needs five to seven minutes to reach the effective shooting distance (or are you cross-country 100 km. In a straight line?).

              Now remember that 4-6 km. for a 57mm gun, which will actually stand on the T-57 Armata, this is already the effective shooting distance ... and it will become even more boring.

              Well, in a situation where "all the same flew in" protected by the standards of tanks (!) Of the 21st century BMP T-14 as inspires much more.
              Yes, by the way ... "Attacking from above"? Good luck smashing the UNHANDED tower.
              1. Forest
                Forest 23 July 2016 11: 10
                0
                So find such places. The Germans in the 44th in the 45th had a problem choosing the Tigers positions for shelling our troops with a range of 2 km, and here 10 km is everywhere, which is impossible even in the desert.
                Just Cornet and requires target tracking - he is still 2 generation and GOS he does not.
                What will the 57 mm caliber projectile do at 4 km, which at 1000 m penetrates all 70 mm armor, while the 25 mm BOPS is 120 mm. And in general - 4-6 km is the battle distance for the OS of shells that even Hammer will not always hit.
                I do not believe in the T-15 ballistic booking. The closest in size to Armata Leo, but its mass in the 2A7 variant is 70 tons, and the T-14 weighs 48 tons, the T-15 is 50 tons. Therefore, the armor is several times smaller.
                What is the difference, inhabited tower or not? After the breakdown, the armored vehicle will still fail, so the task will be completed.
  • pimen
    pimen 21 July 2016 12: 56
    +2
    Quote: Forest
    2) Mobility - if our 14-ton BMP-2 21,4 hp / t, then the 43-ton Puma 25,3 hp / t. I think further comments are unnecessary.

    the difference will be only at 14 tons: 4x14 = 56 hp Everything else on the Puma dviglo - minus
    1. Come on
      Come on 21 July 2016 14: 30
      +1
      The Puma dviglo more powerful than the T-72 and the machine itself is very mobile.
      1. Malkor
        Malkor 21 July 2016 15: 05
        0
        more than 1130 hp ? doubtful. You bent about your cougar.
        1. Come on
          Come on 21 July 2016 15: 49
          0
          Why bent it? They are the same in weight, but Puma is faster and more dynamic. 1090 h.p. Puma, but due to the modern transmission and other nodes affecting the dynamics of the Puma will be brighter.
        2. Forest
          Forest 21 July 2016 21: 45
          0
          T-72B and B3 have 840 hp, BA 1000 hp, Puma 1088.
        3. Philip Staros
          Philip Staros 22 July 2016 22: 19
          +1
          He's about the base 840 hp.
      2. Philip Staros
        Philip Staros 22 July 2016 22: 21
        +1
        movable. On the highway. Or the steppe.
        And how are you going through the forests and swamps on it?
        True, this problem will arise in Almaty too :)
        Yes, and that all were harassed before the ancient BMP-2?
        Well, at least they would remember about three rubles.
        Yes, and this is not fair. These machines are a new generation. They are compared correctly with the Kurgan and T-14 which are already in the installation series.
  • venik
    venik 21 July 2016 13: 44
    +6
    Quote: Forest
    1) Protection - in the forehead with a set of additional armor it holds from 500 m BOPS up to 50 mm and RPG-7, and this is up to 250 and 600 mm homogenes against kinetic and cumulative ammunition. Board and feed are protected from KPVT. An explosion of 10 kg of TNT can withstand under the bottom. 2) Mobility - if our 14-ton BMP-2 has 21,4 hp / t, then the 43-ton Puma has 25,3 hp / t. I think further comments are unnecessary. 3) The armament is excellent - the 30-mm MK-30 is generally beyond comparison with the trash that is installed on our infantry fighting vehicles and armored personnel carriers, including the T-15 and Kurganets-25. Plus ATGM Spike 3 generations. The machine gun is weak, of course, 5,56, but it is still not the main weapon.


    Excuse me, but what do you actually want to prove? What Puma is a good car? So who would doubt it - EXCELLENT car !!!
    And about the BMP-T-15 "Armata" - there is a special question here! Well, do you really think that the BMP, which they tried to bring in terms of protection to the level of a tank, will be more reliable and protected than a modern tank, which has been turned into an BMP ???

    PS To compare Puma with BMP-2 and even with BMP-3 - I think it's incorrect - different "weight categories" - the first 2 are floating, and Puma is HEAVY (not floating) !!!
    1. Come on
      Come on 21 July 2016 14: 37
      -2
      Quote: venik
      Comparing Puma with BMP-2 and even BMP-3 - I think it is incorrect - different "weight categories" - the first 2 are floating, and Puma is HEAVY (not floating) !!!


      It’s correct, like comparing the T-72B3 with the Leo2A7M +, since the BMP 1,2 and a couple of hundred 3 is what the army is exploiting. Then it turns out that BMP 1 and 2 are compared with Marder, and BMP-3 with Puma. That’s when Kurganians and Barberries will be adopted by the RA, at least a few dozen each, then we will compare them with the Puma. In the meantime, little is known about the T-15 and Kurganets, except for the weapons, which, thanks to the same 2A42, or 2A72, lose to the Puma’s weapons in terms of accuracy and power of the BC. I don’t understand why so far for 2A42 / 2A72 they have not washed down the steel casing to increase accuracy, as was done on Puma, or on the same Bucephalus BTR-4.
      1. venik
        venik 21 July 2016 16: 46
        +1
        Quote: Yeah, well.
        I don’t understand why so far for 2A42 / 2A72 they have not washed down the steel casing to increase accuracy, as was done on Puma, or on the same Bucephalus BTR-4


        Firstly, if you were more attentive, you would have noticed that both the Armata BMP and Kurganets - the barrel is closed in a SQUARE casing !!!

        Unfortunately, it’s not possible to insert a photo (can someone tell me how to do this?).
      2. venik
        venik 22 July 2016 18: 26
        +2
        Quote: Yeah, well.
        In the meantime, little is known about the T-15 and Kurganets, except maybe the weapons, which, thanks to the same 2A42, or 2A72, lose to the Puma’s weapons in terms of accuracy and power of the BC


        Little is known about their weapons, too! Just what they saw not in the parade ... For example, about the BMP-T-15 it is very likely to say that there will be a 57-mm gun with guided projectiles and remote-detonation shells. At least, it seems that the Baikal / Derivation modules for the BMP-3 turned out to be heavy, they seem to be planning on the T-15 (with a weight in the form of ATGMs).
      3. Philip Staros
        Philip Staros 22 July 2016 22: 24
        +2
        How many Pumas were put in the army? If our Kurganets is a year or two behind, this is no reason not to take it into account.
        And about swimming - just imagine a situation on rough terrain with rivers and streams ... How many places will there be for Pum? And how many mines and ambushes in these places will be at the time of their arrival :)
    2. Forest
      Forest 21 July 2016 21: 48
      -2
      Yes, Puma is the best modern BMP for the European theater.
      I doubt the armor protection of the entire Armat line that they can generally protect against what is stronger than 2A20 or L-7.
      Whether they swim or not, they will have to collide regardless of mass. In battle, no one will look at it.
      1. Philip Staros
        Philip Staros 22 July 2016 22: 27
        +4
        This is already trolling.
        Armats are the most secure machines in the world. This is a fact that no one seems to dispute. They are compared in 60+ ton Western tanks and they are drained. And you "doubt". Oh well...
        Once again ... Then learn how to extract the cubic root in dealing with volumes. And consider the simple form of habitable machine volume without a crew in the tower.
        And, for the third time, the main defense is active systems. Which in the West are still "taking their first steps."
        1. Forest
          Forest 23 July 2016 11: 14
          0
          Find armor in the largest tank and infantry fighting vehicles that weigh less than almost all modern MBTs (only T-90A and Type 10 are lighter). A vehicle with a mass of T-90AM and a size almost 2 times trivial could not be better armored. Just turn on your head.
          What are you clinging to with the root - where did you give the formulas here?
          No matter how adequate the KAZ, the KOEP has not been created since the 80's, whereas in the West this was equipped with almost all the equipment.
        2. voyaka uh
          voyaka uh 24 July 2016 10: 17
          +1
          "Well, and, for the third time, the main defense is active systems. Which in the West are" taking their first steps "." ////

          Absolutely.
          Everything ultimately rests on KAZ.

          Good BMP or bad comes down to:
          can she bring down the approaching TOU2 or Cornet or not.
  • Wasiliy1985
    Wasiliy1985 21 July 2016 19: 35
    -1
    Is this 2A42 that trash ?! Forest, go forest to your own forest, connoisseur, spruce-pala ..
    1. Forest
      Forest 21 July 2016 21: 52
      +2
      Quote: Wasiliy1985
      Is this 2A42 that trash ?! Forest, go forest to your own forest, connoisseur, spruce-pala ..

      When the penetration of an 30-mm gun at distances up to 500 m loses to an 14,5-mm machine gun - this is generally a clinical lag. On 1000 m, the 2A42 BOPS penetrates 28 mm, and the Bushmister Bradley crowbar pierces 120 mm, MK30 of this Cougar is 150 mm. I don’t know what you need to smoke in order to put such a backward system on technology. It would be better to stick a couple of KPVT and AGS.
  • venik
    venik 25 July 2016 13: 39
    0
    Quote: Forest
    Protection - in the forehead with a set of additional armor holds from 500 m BOPS up to 50 mm and RPG-7, and this is up to 250 and 600 mm homogenous
    1. venik
      venik 25 July 2016 15: 43
      +2
      Quote: venik
      Quote: Forest Protection - in the forehead with a set of additional armor holds from 500 m BOPS up to 50 mm and RPG-7, and this is up to 250 and 600 mm homogenous


      Unfinished - I-no buggy!
      And for the T-15, protection in the frontal projection is equivalent to 900 mm homogenous (and not 250 and not 600). Well, what are we going to say now?
    2. venik
      venik 25 July 2016 15: 43
      0
      Quote: venik
      Quote: Forest Protection - in the forehead with a set of additional armor holds from 500 m BOPS up to 50 mm and RPG-7, and this is up to 250 and 600 mm homogenous


      Unfinished - I-no buggy!
      And for the T-15, protection in the frontal projection is equivalent to 900 mm homogenous (and not 250 and not 600). Well, what are we going to say now?
  • Come on
    Come on 21 July 2016 14: 26
    -3
    Quote: venik
    If you are saying so, then be so kind as to specify in which parameters Puma has no analogues?


    According to the SLA. This is the first and, in my opinion, the only BMP with SLA at the tank level. Range of aimed fire with 3km programmable shells. Also, the level of protection is higher than that of any other BMP (of course there is Namer, but this is an armored personnel carrier).
    1. Malkor
      Malkor 21 July 2016 15: 13
      +4
      It’s not clear, write the MSA from the tank to put on the BMP so it will be better or what? Life case when a BMP-3 in Saudi Arabia went through the adjustment and alignment of sights and guns in the location of its units, drove off to the firing range and then watched a picture of how leklers had configured and verified the equipment in the location of the units, after they arrived at the field, the equipment was checked again - because otherwise it did not bring the desired accuracy. OMS is different.
      1. Come on
        Come on 21 July 2016 15: 37
        0
        Not from the SLA tank, but at the Leo2 MBT level, which is an optoelectronic component, as well as stabilization. It can carry out aimed fire at full speed.
    2. venik
      venik 21 July 2016 16: 07
      +3
      Quote: Yeah, well.
      According to the SLA. This is the first and, in my opinion, the only BMP with SLA at the tank level. Range of aimed fire with 3km programmable shells. Also, the level of protection is higher than that of any other BMP (of course there is Namer, but this is an armored personnel carrier).


      It's "your way"! And what is it really ?? On BMP-T-15 Va-a-shche they plan to put a 57-mm module (of the "Derivation" type) with shells not only "remote detonation", but also with a laser beam guided !!! Apart from all the rest of the electronics, incl. systems of ACTIVE PROTECTION !!!
      So, what is next? (I'm not going to say "that somewhere in the field of ballet, we are ahead of the rest .."). Just a question! ARE YOU SURE??? (If "yes" - you can minus) !!!
      1. Forest
        Forest 21 July 2016 21: 56
        -1
        Quote: venik
        Quote: Yeah, well.
        According to the SLA. This is the first and, in my opinion, the only BMP with SLA at the tank level. Range of aimed fire with 3km programmable shells. Also, the level of protection is higher than that of any other BMP (of course there is Namer, but this is an armored personnel carrier).


        On BMP-T-15 Va-a-shche they plan to put a 57-mm module (of the "Derivation" type) with shells not only "remote detonation", but also with a laser beam guided !!! Apart from all the rest of the electronics, incl. systems of ACTIVE PROTECTION !!!

        The 57-mm C-60 anti-aircraft gun of the 1950 model of the year, which is placed in the Baikal module, has ONLY armor-piercing caliber and fragmentation tracer. Not even a high-explosive shell. A BPS shooting is impossible, because the trunk burns down.
        1. venik
          venik 22 July 2016 17: 07
          +1
          Quote: Forest
          The 57-mm C-60 anti-aircraft gun of the 1950 model of the year, which is placed in the Baikal module, has ONLY armor-piercing caliber and fragmentation tracer. Not even a high-explosive shell. A BPS shooting is impossible, because the trunk burns down.


          Sorry, dear, but you seem a little behind life !! Such information has long been walking on the Internet:

          QUOTE
          [Director of the Central Research Institute "Burevestnik", part of the Uralvagonzavod concern, Georgy Zakamennykh said at the KADEX-2016 arms exhibition in Kazakhstan that a prototype of the self-propelled anti-aircraft artillery complex "Derivation-Air Defense" will be ready by 2017 ....
          ... .KB Tochmash them. AE Nudelman, who developed a guided artillery shell for a 57-mm anti-aircraft gun with a high probability of hitting a target approaching the performance of anti-aircraft missiles. The probability of hitting a small target with sound velocity with two shells reaches 0,8. ... A guided artillery shell (UAS) was created at Tochmash Design Bureau under the improved Petrel artillery system BASED on the S-60 gun, created back in the mid-40s ... ..
          ... .. The warhead mass is 2 kilograms, the explosive is 400 grams, which corresponds to the mass of the explosive of a standard artillery shell of 76 mm caliber.
          ... .. Especially for the ZAK-57 "Derivation-Air Defense" a multifunctional projectile with a remote fuse is also being developed, the features of which are not disclosed. 57 mm STANDARD shells will also be used - Shrapnel-tracer and armor-piercing shells.]
          END OF QUOTATION.

          No, well, of course you can imagine that Georgy Zakamennykh is a "liar, a chatterbox and a giggle" and that everything he blabbed there is pure lies and fiction, but for some reason I believe HIM more than YOU !!!

          PS Please note: Please note - this is not about installing the S-60 system on Baikal / Derivation, but about an IMPROVED system created on the S-60 BASIS!
          1. Forest
            Forest 22 July 2016 21: 48
            0
            There of the improvements, only a new feed system, which increases the rate of fire. For advertising, you can say anything. New shells are good if they produce 500-600 per year. Tank shells Lead-2, EMNIP, for 5 years, about 1000 pieces were delivered. This is not enough for a tank shell. Well, as you can see for yourself, there is no information on BPS, without which it is impossible to hit a modern BMP and armored personnel carrier with a projectile of the 30's, and with 1 km it will not even take it on board.
        2. Philip Staros
          Philip Staros 22 July 2016 22: 33
          +2
          If the gun has a standard caliber and is compatible with old shells, then what does the "ancient" cannon have to do with it? Are the pistols that are made under the "patron of the image" of such a shaggy year - are they all "pre-war"?

          In general, you are a strange type, to be honest. Well, they would go, about ... whether the government or "thieving officials" or even "... but we can't make our own iPhone."
          Well, why substitute in such topics?
          1. Forest
            Forest 23 July 2016 10: 44
            -1
            Unlike armored vehicles, a person does not change the composition of the skin and the structure of internal organs in order to increase his vitality. Even bulletproof vests have a strong weight limit. Yes, and the old cartridge type 7,62x54 can trite through the armor to break the ribs.
            And the fact that the gun is old - it is OFFICIALLY stated, read something other than the news from the journalists that AFAR stuck on the T-14.
            If you point out the flaws - then immediately liberalist? Maybe it's better to fix the flaws than to collect them?
    3. venik
      venik 21 July 2016 17: 05
      +3
      Quote: Yeah, well.
      Also, the level of protection is higher than that of any other BMP


      If I (the past ZBD) would be offered (to choose) in which BMP to sit: in Puma or in "Armata" - I would not hesitate to choose the latter !!!
    4. venik
      venik 21 July 2016 17: 05
      0
      Quote: Yeah, well.
      Also, the level of protection is higher than that of any other BMP


      If I (the past ZBD) would be offered (to choose) in which BMP to sit: in Puma or in "Armata" - I would not hesitate to choose the latter !!!
  • venik
    venik 21 July 2016 08: 46
    +5
    which the manufacturer describes as "the most powerful BMP in the world."

    ==
    Interestingly, how then BMP-T14 "Armata" ??? Of course, she has not entered service yet, but is already "on the way." Something "I am tormented by vague suspicions" that a 30-ton vehicle will be more powerful than a 50-ton one (besides, if the latter is equipped with a 57-mm cannon as planned) !!!!!
    1. Come on
      Come on 21 July 2016 14: 39
      -1
      Puma in full body kit is about 45 T.
      1. kugelblitz
        kugelblitz 21 July 2016 17: 10
        +2
        The difference is that the T-15 is made on a tank chassis and with the corresponding initial reservation, and also has reserves for building up its skin.

        The cougar, though a thick-skinned BMP, is made on a lighter chassis and its armor without a body kit is unlikely to recapture a serious caliber.
  • Skubudu
    Skubudu 21 July 2016 09: 58
    +8
    Puma, after installing the Protection Class C kit and Spike LR, will be good.
    BC 400 cannon shells is not enough in my opinion.
    But for the $ 5 that they ask for 000 Puma, I'd rather buy a BMP T-000 compared to which a puma can.
    1. Come on
      Come on 21 July 2016 14: 45
      -6
      Quote: Skubudu
      I'd rather buy a BMP T-15 compared to which a puma can.


      A bold statement, given that no one except the developers knows anything about the T-15 and judging by the fact that the T-15 didn’t even try to take measures to reduce the vibrations of the 2A72 barrel (like a steel casing and reduce the rate of fire) and the lack of a programmable ammunition, in terms of the main armament, or rather its effectiveness, the T-15 loses to Pume.
      1. Skubudu
        Skubudu 21 July 2016 15: 33
        +1
        In a duel battle, Puma has little chance against the T-15
        T-15 will discover Puma earlier thanks to AFAR and will hit Cornet.
        in the event that the Puma still sees the T-15 she will not be able to hit her with anything, the Puma currently does not even have an ATGM, but it will be purchased.
        Even if Spike fires, Afghanit intercepts him.
        Only the presence of a radar puts the T-15 head and shoulders above any BMP.
        T-15 at least will not receive an unexpectedly flown missile from Whatever Apache.
        Puma is a blind kitten ... there is no radar.
        1. Come on
          Come on 21 July 2016 15: 58
          +1
          Quote: Skubudu
          Puma is a blind kitten ... there is no radar.


          Enchanting! :) Only can it be better to wait when the T-15 is finished and when the developers confirm the declared performance characteristics and functionality of the same "Afghanite" and when will it be adopted? And then the Germans have a ready-made, tested and adopted BMP and a ready-made KAZ AMAP-ADS, which has been tested, is offered on the arms market and is already being integrated, as n of the item. for Leo2 for Indonesia.
          1. Skubudu
            Skubudu 21 July 2016 16: 57
            0
            Quote: Yeah, well.
            Quote: Skubudu
            Puma is a blind kitten ... there is no radar.


            Enchanting! :) Only can it be better to wait when the T-15 is finished and when the developers confirm the declared performance characteristics and functionality of the same "Afghanite" and when will it be adopted? And then the Germans have a ready-made, tested and adopted BMP and a ready-made KAZ AMAP-ADS, which has been tested, is offered on the arms market and is already being integrated, as n of the item. for Leo2 for Indonesia.

            KAZ is there but did not find a word about Radar
        2. voyaka uh
          voyaka uh 24 July 2016 22: 44
          +1
          "T-15 will detect the Puma earlier thanks to AFAR" ////

          Are you sure that the T-15 has AFAR?
          He is not even on the Su-35 fighter, but on the BMP it is doubtful ...
          And putting it on armored vehicles is actually not for detecting enemy equipment,
          and to detect flying rockets and grenades. Well, and bring them down.
      2. venik
        venik 22 July 2016 18: 55
        +1
        Quote: Yeah, well.
        A bold statement, given that no one except the developers knows anything about the T-15


        Why, something has already "leaked" - http://www.modernarmy.ru/article/480/bmp-t-15-barbaris

        Quote: Yeah, well.
        judging by the fact that for the T-15 they didn’t even try to take measures to reduce the vibrations of the 2A72 barrel (like a steel casing and lowering the rate of fire)


        There, by the way, there is a photo - it is clearly visible that the gun is enclosed in a square casing !!!

        Quote: Yeah, well.
        the lack of a programmable BC, in terms of main armament, or rather its effectiveness, the T-15 loses to Pume


        In the same article it is indicated that a variant with a 57-mm cannon is also supposed to be (and this, as you know, was created, among other things, for the use of guided and programmable shells) ...
      3. Philip Staros
        Philip Staros 22 July 2016 22: 40
        +2
        Are you really not catching up, or pretending to be?
        The old thirty was put on Armata "so that there is no hole."
        Who needs to know enough about the T-15 even on the basis of limited data. For example, the T-15 will have active defense systems like the T-14. These systems are the "distant future" for Western ground forces.

        The "main weapon" of the T-15 has both programmable and adjustable projectiles, which, again, you've already been told half a dozen times.
        The Germans are great. They know how to make armored fighting vehicles. Probably you can compare Puma with Kurgan. At least according to Kurganets, so far no special miracles have been told. But Armata is a different level. Do not humiliate German designers.
        1. Forest
          Forest 23 July 2016 11: 18
          0
          Show the new gun. And do not poke the C-60 anti-aircraft gun. Active defense systems in the West are widespread, unlike our army, where only KOEP Curtain 80's.
          How can the OFS, even promising, fight against armored vehicles? Will enemies die of laughter?
          The Kurganets weighs TOTAL 25 tons, and the Puma weighs 43 tons. Moreover, the Kurganets are longer, wider and taller, so armor is not foreseen there, as was shown in the video from the Star on the BMP assembly.
      4. Snow323
        Snow323 29 July 2016 16: 31
        +1
        Quote: Yeah, well.
        A bold statement, given that no one except the developers knows anything about the T-15 and judging by the fact that the T-15 didn’t even try to take measures to reduce the vibrations of the 2A72 barrel (like a steel casing and reduce the rate of fire) and the lack of a programmable ammunition, in terms of the main armament, or rather its effectiveness, the T-15 loses to Pume.

        There is a programmable ammunition for 2a42.
    2. voyaka uh
      voyaka uh 25 July 2016 20: 28
      0
      Instead of an infantry compartment, I would place a 120 mm mortar on Puma. They are
      Now compact enough with shock absorbers. And they do mine
      GPS tips for increased accuracy. And two people are operators.
      It will turn out a fairly versatile fighting vehicle for 5 crew members.
  • kugelblitz
    kugelblitz 21 July 2016 10: 08
    +1
    Of all the cars, VBCI liked the most. Okay, aluminum and technological.
  • chunga-changa
    chunga-changa 21 July 2016 10: 38
    +1
    Very informative review, thanks to the author.
  • Leonid Har
    Leonid Har 21 July 2016 10: 41
    +2
    Which one can compare with the T-15? They are all inferior in protection.
    1. cast iron
      cast iron 23 October 2016 23: 06
      0
      Do you have data on the protection of the T-15? )))
  • Anatoly
    Anatoly 21 July 2016 18: 02
    0
    The whole point is why this or that vehicle is being created, an armored personnel carrier is a means of delivering personnel to the front line, therefore, it does not need powerful weapons, but BMP, in addition to delivery, is a means of supporting infantry, this is where good protection and powerful weapons are needed, and with current tendencies to increase calibers, down to ship cannons, will lead to a severe restriction in the use of light infantry fighting vehicles and armored personnel carriers on the battlefield. Therefore, I think that on the T-15 edge a 57mm gun is needed to effectively deal with cougars and similar cars, and there is no price for it in the city, because in fact it is the same BMPT only with an amphibious assault.
  • Wasiliy1985
    Wasiliy1985 21 July 2016 19: 49
    +2
    “We now have a fully stabilized weapon system, which, without a doubt, is very different from the Marder weapon system, because the vehicle had to stop to fire,” says one of the students. “That is, we can now fight in the same ranks with the Leopard main battle tank (MBT).”

    This is the passage !!!
    Of course, now Puma is "unparalleled" for them.
    So, we still had a stabilizer on the BMP-2, and it got itself on the go for purposes on its own ..
    So, frankly, "not available" analogs are already being prepared for decommissioning, after the expiration of the resource or storage periods.
    The Germans back in the 80s, or something, the Estonians were gaining slowness ?!
  • Wasiliy1985
    Wasiliy1985 21 July 2016 19: 54
    +2
    Well, the MK 30 cannon, beloved by comrade Lesnoy (so to speak, "a masterpiece of the world cannon building, compared with which everything Russian is rubbish"):
    "Mauser MK 30 is a 30 mm automatic cannon from Mauser. The name of the sample is from German Maschinen Kanone. Developed by Mauser by the beginning of the 1980s." (quote from wikipedia) ..
    What can I say ..? Novye, no question ..
    1. Come on
      Come on 22 July 2016 01: 47
      -1
      Quote: Wasiliy1985
      What can I say ..? Novye, no questions asked.


      Then her ship version came out, with a rate of fire of 800 high / s, and for Puma it was completely redone.
      1. Philip Staros
        Philip Staros 22 July 2016 22: 46
        +3
        Well, yes ... For the Puma, the gun was "completely altered" and it is "new". And "Baikal" is a "50th cannon". Of course, they will do the barrels using WWII technologies, and so the shooting has grown several times "by itself - two springs have changed" ... Well, the guided shells of the "wrong system" - they are not German.
        And the 30mm cannon may be really good. No problem. Let them do it. And ours simply doubled the caliber and closed the question of "pussy-room".
  • Snow323
    Snow323 29 July 2016 16: 24
    +1
    Quote: Forest
    When the penetration of an 30-mm gun at distances up to 500 m loses to an 14,5-mm machine gun - this is generally a clinical lag. On 1000 m, the 2A42 BOPS penetrates 28 mm, and the Bushmister Bradley crowbar pierces 120 mm, MK30 of this Cougar is 150 mm. I don’t know what you need to smoke in order to put such a backward system on technology. It would be better to stick a couple of KPVT and AGS.

    It depends on which projectile, perspective arrow - 100mm in 2a42
  • Dart
    Dart 30 September 2016 23: 39
    0
    Quote: Forest
    I do not believe

    Is this worth taking as an argument?))))
    Very similar to "vivsevreti")))
    Your subjective faith is nothing in front of dry data.
  • cast iron
    cast iron 23 October 2016 23: 03
    0
    None of the readers noticed the obvious illogicality of the assertion that the additional armored panels of the German "Puma" (and they weigh 9 tons) are supposedly EASY !!!!! installed by the crew)))) I advise you to carry at least 5 tons of bags of sand or cement. It is very difficult and very slow))))