Military Review

BMP: stupid costs or the right strategy?

230
Do we have elections on the nose? How many "smart people" appeared on TV screens! How many of those who suddenly attended to the welfare of the common man, about saving the budget, about the future! Touches, you know. You begin to believe that the day after the election, life will begin to drastically improve.

If not for these aspects and nuances.

Sometimes you don’t even think about some things, but once you hear another “smart”, you’re starting to think that either you don’t understand anything or you put a next “guardian” in the zomboyaschik. Who knows better than you how to do.

So everything seems to be right. And about old people in nursing homes is true. And about the road. Even about pensions and salaries is true. And about the communal. Only now I recall the fate of many countries where this point of view has won. And the experience of the ancestors, genetically laid down by the father and mother, is also somehow against such a formulation of the question. I do not want to walk in lackeys. Nature is not the same.

And sometimes it rushes from the air, which tempts us to go to the far box, where the diploma of military school graduation lies, and once again remind ourselves that yes, I studied. And I have to think. In contrast to the "guardians".

A strange topic began to raise in the debate. The topic of unnecessary costs for weapons and equipment. Why do we need new, if most countries feel great on our old technology? And those who are trying to give a hint about the country's defense, immediately receive the label "hawks". You what? Can you seriously think that Americans need a war? Well, you, old man, and a moron. Everyone understands that war is the destruction of the entire globe.

Especially for some reason goes to our armored vehicles. The euphoria of "Almaty" has passed. More precisely, the tank became a reality. But the BMP is still causing concern to the "guardians for the fate of the people." Why do we need so many BMP? There are excellent BMP-3, BMP-4. The following are developed. And then the BMP T-15, BMP "Kurganets", BMP "Boomerang". And all the cars are different. Where are we so much? For what? There are so many more problems in the country, and here all these armored boxes ...

And what is most interesting, the mass of the audience is conducted on such an approach. Judging by the polls, calls, SMS and other related nonsense.

It is clear that who watches the "1 channel", that on the "Star" has nothing to do. Who lives on "Peekaboo", that "Military Review" is wild and incomprehensible. However, we also thought about this topic. The box is he, ****, contagious.



BMP T-15. The heavy car. Weight 50 tons. Armor protection is not inferior tank. Carries 9 people. The corresponding dimensions are 9,5 meters in length and 4,8 in width. Even an engine of 1500 forces was created specifically for this machine.

Accordingly, such a machine will cost accordingly. Tank, he is a tank. Let it be treated with something like that ...



What is the main essence of T-15?

The BMP T-15 is a combat vehicle of the network-centric warfare, that is, it is capable of transmitting data on detected targets to destroy tactical echelon to other vehicles and, in turn, receive tasks for the destruction of targets that are adequate for BMP armament. The practical implementation of such a scenario is made through a unified management system of the tactical level.

This is actually a multipurpose combat tool that allows solving on the battlefield both the tasks of countering the enemy’s tanks and BMPs and the air defense tasks. The anti-tank complex is focused on the destruction of modern tanks with active defense, air defense is capable of working both on the UAV and on anti-tank helicopters. Type "Apache".

The main force is modularity. T-15 in addition to everything can change weapon systems. It can be “sharpened” in air defense with the help of the “Baikal” module with an 57-mm naval anti-aircraft gun, you can make an 120-mm mortar, you can make an ATGM complex.



A heavy tank support vehicle capable of following them at least to the place of use of nuclear weapons, and carrying a whole branch of infantry as support.



BMP "Kurganets" - a lighter car of the middle class. 25 tons of weight. Able to carry 8 people. Accordingly, the dimensions are reduced. 7,2 meters in length and 3,6 in width. However, this reduction was achieved by reducing protection. Armor machine bulletproof. True, the crew is protected by a transmission, a new complex of active protection along the sides, the frontal armor is significantly enhanced. For such a machine is enough 800-strong engine. The machine has good mobility and, most importantly, can swim.

It is on this machine will lay the main burden in the armed forces. She will become the main BMP. Naturally, the price of such a machine is much more democratic.

BMP: stupid costs or the right strategy?


Again, modularity. Again, the possibility of using various weapons, up to 125-mm anti-tank gun.



BMP "Boomerang". This is a wheeled car. Accordingly, the weaker BMP is protected T-15, but about the same as the BMP "Kurganets".

Wheels, unlike caterpillars, provide sufficient speed and range. With 510-strong engines provides speeds up to 100 km per hour and a power reserve of 800 kilometers. At the moment, Boomerang is considered one of the best cars in its class. The weight of the new BMP is less than the weight of the Kurgan. But insignificantly.

And again, the ability to change the configuration of weapons. From the standard "Boomeranga-BM" to heavier things.



And now we will answer the question of "people-lovers". Why do we need so many completely different cars? Why such costs? Universal BMP would be cheaper. Yes, and repair universal machines more convenient. Remember the famous film "In war, as in war ...". An episode with a burden? "I'll get to the first tank, take off, and go further."

But if we are already talking to "economists", then we will have to speak in the language of numbers.

Modern military conflicts, in which Russian and other units participated, are carefully analyzed for the necessary sufficiency of weapons and armored vehicles to ensure the fulfillment of the tasks received. Any army of peace is built on this principle.

In addition, most armies go to the contract method of formation. And that means, a soldier must be prepared in his specialty as "excellent." Training such a soldier is not very cheap. These are not dozens, they are hundreds of thousands of rubles, and in some cases millions. And this "dear" soldier must be protected. War in the style of the second world will not. Specialists will fight. And to replace them quickly will be problematic. So, there will be problems with the use of equipment and weapons.

Will the BMP with anti-bullet armor be able to ensure the safe movement of soldiers on the battlefield in the case of the use of anti-tank guns? Even in the case of using conventional anti-aircraft guns, the survival options of such machines are few.

And can even middle-class BMPs like the Kurgan type be used effectively by scouts? Alas, but speed largely determines the actions of such units. Yes, and they act, most often will be where the danger of working on them artillery is minimal. But the wheels do not have such a cross as the tracks.

We think the need for different types of BMP is obvious. But the cost question is still worth it. So spending or saving?

The answer is saving! In what?

In fact, the main thing is not the BMP themselves. The main thing - the platform. Only three platforms that allow you to mount on them a variety of weapons and equipment. So, we receive not one car, but a line of cars of the most various purpose. Thus, the defense industry has ensured the unification of military equipment.

Moreover, the Boomerang combat automatic complex is installed on all the machines. That is, repairs on the battlefield can be made even in sets from other BMPs. By the way, the Boomerang complex includes weapons systems that are already in service and used either as an independent weaponor as a module of other systems. For example, anti-tank missile complex "Kornet". Or 30-mm automatic gun.

The same modular principle is used to create the BMP itself. Repair and replacement of such modules can be made by repair teams right on the front line. Using either your own or "foreign" modules. Both new and removed from non-viable machines.

We talk a lot about rearming our army. We perfectly understand that it costs a lot of money. And the economic situation is such that there is no extra money. However, based on the foregoing, it becomes clear that our defense made a feat. This is not a beautiful word, it is a fact.

Rearming the army and not ravaging the country is indeed a feat. And all the groans about unnecessary spending need to stop.

And yet, the platform is the coming future. While not everyone understands this. But it is so. The fact that practically any weapons and equipment can be put on the platform will allow the defense industry to give the army what is necessary in a specific period as soon as possible. Yes, and the latest designs will be created with the possibility of their speedy installation on such platforms. The prospects are huge.

This is the practical embodiment of Putin’s words about the necessary sufficiency of the army. We have what we need, but we will always have as much as necessary.

It is a pity that not everyone in the country understands this. Especially viewers of the "1 channel" ...
Author:
230 comments
Ad

Subscribe to our Telegram channel, daily additional materials that do not get on the site: https://t.me/topwar_ru

Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. aszzz888
    aszzz888 29 July 2016 06: 41
    +21
    Especially the viewers of Channel 1 ...

    The article is good, relevant, thanks to the authors. But from the "viewers of the 1st channel", such a campaign will not wait.
    Brace yourself now!
    1. qwert
      qwert 29 July 2016 07: 35
      +67
      About the "Star". Was I the only one who noticed that "Zvezda" is turning into an ordinary channel in the style of TV3, RenTV, etc.? Shows appeared, films are mostly modern, i.e. filmed as part of the "fight against Stalinism", and as a result, with the inversion of the same history of the Great Patriotic War. Plus they added cheap militants of the Gorbachev-Yeltsin era. Those. really stupid and cheap. As I understand it, their leadership changed, or they were forced to be "In the spirit of the times."
      Now to the point. Sense on 25 the tons, huge Kurgan to put a mortar? MT-LB will be both easier and cheaper, and as a self-propelled mortar not a gram is no less effective. About the Boomerang. Does anyone bother size? The meaning of such a motor home? Of course, I am for a strong Army and for its technical updating, but let me express my opinion:
      If the designers of the SOVIET school created these cars, then we would have got cars of the same security and firepower, but one and a half times smaller in weight and size (respectively, and price). It is unreasonable to abandon the workflow of the original original BTT design school, especially considering that thanks to it we have been leaders in armored vehicles for many years. There was no need to imitate Western schools, creating machines that were monstrous in size and solving problems in the forehead by increasing weight.
      1. wanderer_032
        wanderer_032 29 July 2016 09: 32
        +17
        Quote: qwert
        Was I the only one who noticed that "Zvezda" is turning into an ordinary channel in the style of TV3, RenTV, etc.?


        Not certainly in that way. But such things do take place. It is necessary to find out the reason for the penetration of the "Star" of the virus of consumerism, liberalism, clownery in the style of Zhirik - and eliminate it.
        1. gladcu2
          gladcu2 29 July 2016 14: 48
          +18
          At the expense of the "star", absolutely definitely noticed. I used to watch historical films sometimes. And now only the films are over, only the "star" is not the same.

          More information on the "military channel".
          1. The comment was deleted.
          2. Yars
            Yars 6 November 2016 21: 47
            0
            Quote: gladcu2
            At the expense of the "star", absolutely definitely noticed. I used to watch historical films sometimes. And now only the films are over, only the "star" is not the same.

            More information on the "military channel".

            everyone yells what bad channels "1 channel", "star", etc. ... and what channels do you suggest to watch? RBC? Rain? Or maybe listen to ECHO of Moscow? Why don't you all talk about them that are clearly being ordered from outside ?! What information confuses you on the first channel ?! The VO site has become a bunch of corrupt liberals hiding under patriotic slogans! All these about the lamentable comments here exactly repeat the events in Ukraine not long before the Maidan, exactly the same nonsense poured on the channels that supported Yanukovych, and now the result is on everyone's face and is also trying to do with Russia! If anyone is lying, it's RBC, RAIN and the like! Dear moderators, stop deleting my posts please, I did not offend anyone and write only the truth about corrupt liberals on this site! And since when does the saying "strange little article" violate the rights of this site? There is no right to speak your opinion about the article ?!
      2. EvgNik
        EvgNik 29 July 2016 09: 47
        +20
        Quote: qwert
        Was I the only one who noticed that "Zvezda" is turning into an ordinary channel in the style of TV3, RenTV, etc.?

        My wife had a favorite channel (Zvezda), now she doesn't include it - she says there is nothing to watch.
        And thanks to Alexander and Roman for the article.
        The people then understand that strengthening defense is vital.
      3. Forest
        Forest 29 July 2016 10: 07
        +35
        Quote: qwert
        Sense on 25 the tons, huge Kurgan to put a mortar? MT-LB will be both easier and cheaper, and as a self-propelled mortar not a gram is no less effective. About the Boomerang. Does anyone bother size? The meaning of such a motor home? Of course, I am for a strong Army and for its technical updating, but let me express my opinion:
        If the designers of the SOVIET school created these cars, then we would have got cars of the same security and firepower, but one and a half times smaller in weight and size (respectively, and price). It is unreasonable to abandon the workflow of the original original BTT design school, especially considering that thanks to it we have been leaders in armored vehicles for many years. There was no need to imitate Western schools, creating machines that were monstrous in size and solving problems in the forehead by increasing weight.

        What can a smaller size save from? Now is not the 41 year, when the VET and tanks on the 500 m did not always hit the 3x3 m target. ATGM of the 2 generation will fall into the growth target in skilled hands at 5 km, ATGM of the 3 generation will not miss at all - it’s Wiesel that Armata will get. With a decrease in size, they already played out in due time - now the survivability of armored vehicles after breaking through the armor is unacceptably low, and the crew quickly gets tired. You try to lay the wounded in the BTR-80, not to mention the 70-ke, put it. The crew in tanks sits like a cork, especially if in winter the complexion is dense.
        1. qwert
          qwert 29 July 2016 11: 24
          +5
          Quote: Forest
          What can a smaller size save from? Now is not the 41 year, when the VET and tanks on the 500 m did not always hit the 3x3 m target. ATGM of the 2 generation will fall into the growth target in skilled hands at 5 km, ATGM of the 3 generation will not miss at all - it’s Wiesel that Armata will get.

          Well, I specifically said about the mortar. He works from closed positions. It is difficult to get it with an ATGM, if only from a helicopter, but if it is hot from the helicopter here. Just as it will be hot from the Jewish anti-tank missile striking from above. Therefore, for a mortar bulletproof booking is quite sufficient, who will let him in the front line with the advancing troops. But cheaper. But swims. And cheaper by an order of magnitude. And the cross-country ability of MT-LB is unique. According to this parameter, both tanks and infantry fighting vehicles grow and grow before it.

          Anyway, it bothers me a little (to put it mildly) that it is planned to commission the 200 Armat, to write off the 6000 T-90 and the modernized T-72 due to this. Well, this is not equivalent exchange. The power of the Russian army will not increase from this. And if we need tanks so much, drive the Papuans, and not confront America (NATO or China there), then in general then why were you messing around with Armmatta?
          1. Forest
            Forest 29 July 2016 12: 31
            +28
            Firstly, they are not going to write off MT-LB.
            Secondly, with the mortar, the same 120-mm mine or 105, 155-mm artillery bomb can fly in response. And in the absence of a solid front line, saboteurs can strike at the rear.
            Thirdly, in our army there are only about 2300-2500 tanks, what is the decommissioning of 6000 tanks? Someone grunted and everyone carried the news. Can you imagine that there will be an 1 tank in the tank battalion?
            Fourth, we just need the T-14 in order to fight with NATO or China, not with outdated 72-kami and 90-kami, but with a normal machine.
            1. RexMVDshny
              RexMVDshny 29 July 2016 22: 32
              +5
              Sorry dear, but T72 and 90 are far from obsolete, which shows the experience of the war in Syria, as well as the fact that the same Abrams are outdated long ago that Iraq and Afghanistan showed.
              1. Forest
                Forest 30 July 2016 12: 34
                +9
                Abrams did not adapt at all to support the troops, first of all his task was to defeat armored vehicles. Export vehicles differ from M1A2 SEP v2, which are in service in the USA, weakened by armor and the absence of uranium BOPS - the main weapon of the tank, there are no TUSK kits with DZ, KOEP and DPU. And even then in the forehead except that the Cornet breaks. But 72-cam is very, very hard. Even the RPG-7 prehistoric PG-7 sews the T-72M version in the forehead, not to mention the sides, where, unlike Abrams, there are not even steel screens. And against NATO tanks, perhaps 72B3 can do something. The rest cannot even penetrate into vulnerable zones.
                1. Vlad.by
                  Vlad.by 31 July 2016 14: 31
                  +7
                  Let's do this RPG will flash any existing tank not equipped with DZ and AZ. The cumulative jet doesn’t matter in which country the tank was collected. I affirm to Potma that 72 well equipped with defense elements is no weaker in battle than Abrams. On the other hand, the mass of electronics and optics contributes to the first detection of the enemy, which gives a strong trump card, but ... if Abrams didn’t kill the 72nd or 72nd with the first shot, the chances of surviving with Abrams are the same as in the 72nd with its non-panoramic sights. And even lower, since it’s much easier to damage the panorama. Even getting a simple OFS or a good line from Shilka into the frontal projection deprives Abrams of the same Leo and his vision and hearing with all the consequences. I'm not saying that all these electronic gadgets are bad, but a 100% bet on them is harmful! For example, Americans have almost forgotten how to use paper cards. What for? There is Jeepies. And if he is not? But he certainly will not be in a serious conflict.
                  1. would
                    would 31 July 2016 15: 26
                    +2
                    Even getting a simple OFS or a good line from Shilka into the frontal projection deprives Abrams of the same Leo and his vision and hearing with all the consequences.


                    Only for this, you must first approach Abrams at a distance of defeat, and then be able to shoot and hit. And this is difficult to say the least. To put it mildly difficult. The tank itself has a good situational awareness, to put it mildly, and the same "Shilka" like any other equipment glows wonderfully in thermal imagers of which there are more than one piece of extremely good quality on modern Abrams. Plus, reconnaissance of the area by other means continues, that is, it will not work out just like that and approach the tank.

                    So the given version of incapacitation is rather completely hypothetical at the level of a jihad mobile with a DShK that suddenly materialized in front of the tank, which hits all observation devices and leaves for sunset.
                    1. Vlad.by
                      Vlad.by 31 July 2016 22: 28
                      +3
                      Have you tried to watch a thermal imager in battle? Especially in the daytime and in the city ... Either the bearded Abrams are burning in Yemen by any means, up to heavy machine guns. And then there are grenades, even F1. Even a gap of a lemon a couple of meters in front of the "muzzle" of the same Leo with a probability of% 60 will cut all the optics.
                      Naturally, in a dueling situation, the more gadgets - the better, if there is no interference. But there are still plenty of options, such as ambush actions. It’s not a fact that Abrams gadgets will allow you to discover the rooted 72 or Rapier
                      1. would
                        would 1 August 2016 06: 06
                        +2
                        Tried a chic thing. Especially those who use Westerners. Even during the day, the technique is lit so that it allows you to visit and capture the target. It concerns and ATGM. Or did you think modern ATGMs and ATGMs of 3 generations with infrared seeker are made so that they can work only at night?

                        The bearded harness of the Abrams, but to put it mildly not in the way described. Firstly, when it comes to the city, then tanks never go there first. The infantry conducts reconnaissance, keeps the sector under surveillance, indicates the target’s tank, and already, in turn, it advances to a position and works out from the distance, under the cover of infantry, according to the indicated targets. This is a classic version of the stripping of the city, which is used in particular by the Syrian Arab Army. In the city you can’t double up with Shilka, it’s painfully noticeable. Abrams can still be burned, but not the fantastic actions you described are needed.

                        But this is provided that normal military men will fight, and not some Arabs without knowledge of the tactics of urban battles. These guys are doing such nonsense that it’s even funny: As an example of a column of tanks in Syria, 2 unsuccessful ATGM launches were made. And instead of at least covering themselves with smoke, they simply fired "somewhere there" and continued moving in a column. Naturally, the third ATGM flew into the target.

                        ... And then there are grenades, even F1. Even a gap of a lemon a couple of meters in front of the "muzzle" of the same Leo with a probability of% 60 will cut all the optics.


                        I’ll disappoint you here, the observation devices are wonderfully protected from small fragments and the efk is unlikely to even scratch the bulletproof glass.

                        The dueling situation is the same hypothetical. In modern battles, duels are not involved, a group consisting of various units participates. And the rooted-to-the-spot 72 will not be discovered by Abrams, but by the very "other means." It is relatively easy to do this without using the means of reducing the visibility, the position is stationary.

                        You can burn everything. Even "Armata". But as I already said, not in such fantastical ways, like a duel or the suddenly formed "Shilka" literally in front of the very nose of the tank.
                      2. Vlad.by
                        Vlad.by 1 August 2016 08: 20
                        +1
                        I am ready to subscribe to everything that you have written. The battle manual is written in blood. Unfortunately, only not everyone and not always follow it. This was the case in Afghanistan, this was the case in Chechnya. And the Americans regularly find themselves in situations when the DShK in "impotent rage" hits him in the back from hundreds of meters on Abrams. Where was the infantry, where were the drones - only God knows.
                      3. Forest
                        Forest 1 August 2016 09: 56
                        0
                        Civil thermal imagers 1 generation, military - 3-it. Very high definition.
            2. seos
              seos 11 December 2016 19: 23
              0
              1) MT-LB always cost 3 times cheaper than the BTR-80 and it is logical to assume that at the price of 1 Kurgan or boomerang with a mortar, you can buy 8-10 MT-LB with weapons. Moreover, up to 5 tons of cargo can be hung on MT-LB without loss of buoyancy.
              2) From the reciprocal art. shelling is more likely to survive the small, diamond-shaped MT-LB than the huge boomerang Kurgan.
              3) We have about 16000 tanks in service, of which 2500 are in the troops, the rest are in storage.
              4) What are you not comfortable with the war with NATO on the T-72? NATO in Europe has fewer infantry fighting vehicles and tanks than we have only tanks ..
              In modern combat, tanks do not fight tanks because they do not survive such a collision ... especially in a high-tech conflict.
          2. MaksoMelan
            MaksoMelan 29 July 2016 13: 31
            +6
            It seems that the armature should not be 200 but 2000. Plus, the adjustment of the production of trams with elements of components of reinforcement in the event of war, this production is transferred to the release of the entire range of the platform. Secondly, where to write off. I understand that you can’t write off the T55 T90 either. Unless to sell to Syria or somewhere else and with this money to build a rebar but as an expotra tank it will still bring loot especially after Syria. Besides, even about 72 I never heard that they will be copied. And they are the most proven and numerous. And as for the reservation, I would personally prefer to stay in Kurgan undead in a motolyga.
          3. goose
            goose 29 July 2016 13: 59
            +3
            The MT-LB layout is inconvenient, but otherwise there are no complaints about the car. It was somehow not in our position with our budget to change the price for super-expensive soap.
          4. Alex 1972
            Alex 1972 29 July 2016 20: 53
            0
            T 14 is intended to fight, as I read in an interview with the head of the uralvagonzavod in the escort 3, 4 x t72 / 90
          5. smershxnumx
            smershxnumx 29 July 2016 21: 07
            +2
            As for the choice ... I would drive a Kamaz on "civil" roads ... And on "military" roads - in the "Ural" ... There is a difference in the car (though not significant) ... And the price of this the difference is life ... Although everything is relative ... But the choice would have made exactly that ...
          6. Blackgrifon
            Blackgrifon 29 July 2016 23: 42
            +2
            Quote: qwert
            And in general, it bothers me a little (to put it mildly) that it is planned to commission 200 Armats, to write off 6000 T-90s and modernized T-72s due to this. Well, this is not equivalent exchange. The power of the Russian army will not increase from this.

            1. 2300 T-14 and, as I understand it, plus some other BMs based on the platform.
            2. T-72B3 and T-90 are not going to be written off - at least for sure until 2030. The petrel is gradually brought from the Spartan first version of the T-72B3 to the level of a slingshot - for 2016 and 2017, state contracts were signed for the installation of the Relic RVD (by the way, instead of Contact-5, you can easily install the Relic in the park (if not, correct it), gratings to protect the MTO and automatic gearbox (goodbye leverage), but still without air conditioning, KAZ and remote anti-aircraft machine gun installation.
            3. There are very active rumors in the press about a new version of BMPT with 57 mm Baikal. If anyone in the know - unsubscribe - very interesting. Because it is such a BMPT that will become an excellent addition to tanks and will significantly increase the effectiveness of armored vehicles and infantry in urban conditions (the main thing is that again they do not make the "T-35" five-tower, like Terminator-1, and that the Armed Forces still get this oooooo long-awaited class equipment in sufficient quantity).
          7. Blackgrifon
            Blackgrifon 29 July 2016 23: 48
            +1
            Quote: Blackgrifon
            Therefore, for a mortar bulletproof booking is quite sufficient, who will let him in the front line with the advancing troops. But cheaper. But swims.

            Practice and trends show that in the conditions of hostilities in urban agglomerations (which is now 70% of the main databases, the benefit of 2/3 of the population lives in cities), the self-propelled mortar lives longer and works more efficiently. MTLB does not have a sufficient level of security - only from the lightest rifle. Its plus is precisely the ease of the machine, because in the VChV it was MTLB and BTR-80 that made up the bulk of the BBM. But for the ease of the machine, as mentioned above, you have to pay with low survivability.
          8. Vlad.by
            Vlad.by 31 July 2016 15: 05
            0
            Indeed, there is no need to talk about the mortar. There is NONA, the ZAURALETS is preparing. Why else invent something? Especially since there are already excellent reviews about this weapon. He took a position covertly, and shot to the side. The "probable" have nothing of the kind. Only the Israelis, copying our experience, are matched with their Negev.
        2. goose
          goose 29 July 2016 13: 57
          +8
          Quote: Forest

          The crew in tanks sits like a cork, especially if in winter the complexion is dense.

          This is largely the fault of the equipment. The wadded suit is too thick. If a tanker were dressed in modern tourist clothes, they would normally crawl through the hatches and could spin around in the "cabin". And so yes, in winter it is difficult to meet the standard for leaving the T-72 or BMP-3 in full uniform.
          1. Forest
            Forest 29 July 2016 18: 40
            +5
            Quote: goose

            This is largely the fault of the equipment. The wadded suit is too thick. If a tanker were dressed in modern tourist clothes, they would normally crawl through the hatches and could spin around in the "cabin". And so yes, in winter it is difficult to meet the standard for leaving the T-72 or BMP-3 in full uniform.

            The main problem is how to get a wounded man from a tight fighting compartment. The same mechanical drive can be obtained theoretically purely, but in practice it is practically unrealistic. Although in this regard, Western cars also sin - what is the location of the driver's drive on Leo.
        3. seos
          seos 11 December 2016 19: 44
          0
          In addition to ATGMs, there are RPGs and kinetic weapons of various calibers, for which size matters. Watch "tank biathlon" as they miss the target T-72B3 with the most modern ballistic computers. Go ask one of the teams to reduce the size of the targets, because in modern warfare, size is no longer important ...
          1. svp67
            svp67 11 December 2016 19: 47
            0
            Quote: seos
            Watch "tank biathlon" as they miss the target T-72B3 with the most modern ballistic computers.

            Acre of ballistic computers there is also something else ... that affects the flight of the projectile but alas. not counted on our tanks ...
      4. Lord blacwood
        Lord blacwood 29 July 2016 13: 06
        +4
        There was no need to imitate Western schools, creating machines monstrous in size and solving problems in the forehead by increasing weight.

        And no one imitates Western schools. All these infantry fighting vehicles were created based on the realities of future wars (starting in 2020), in which ATGMs, RPGs, UAVs and other similar toys will be actively used. Therefore, an active defense is needed that will protect against all modern means of warfare.
        Sense on a 25-ton, huge Kurganets to put a mortar? MT-LB will be both easier and cheaper, and as a self-propelled mortar not a gram is no less effective.

        In modern armored vehicles, a whole complex of different types of weapons, from the gun to the ATGM and air defense systems. This makes it possible to create mobile armored squads that are effectively protected and armed (and there is no need to advance with an army of self-propelled mortars and mobile air defense systems). For example, a mortar will be used by the crew against enemy infantry, while anti-UAVs will require air defense systems.
      5. bandabas
        bandabas 29 July 2016 13: 48
        +2
        Not you alone. I won’t be surprised if analogues of Chapman and Prokopenko appear on the channel soon.
        1. gladcu2
          gladcu2 29 July 2016 14: 52
          +9
          By the way, the author very reasonably noted at the expense of the feat, rearmament of the army.

          About this as it is still not mentioned.
      6. Alex 1972
        Alex 1972 29 July 2016 20: 49
        +4
        Quote: qwert
        Now to the point. Sense on a 25-ton, huge Kurganets to put a mortar?

        Dear Che Guevara!
        Without going into details today, many have written that size, taking into account modern means of aiming and pointing, is no longer significant.
        Perhaps the size is due to the effective layout / placement of the crew / landing.
        The Soviet school professed a decrease in reserved volume to reduce the silhouette to complicate the defeat of anti-tank weapons of the 20th century.
        1. seos
          seos 11 December 2016 19: 35
          0
          And what does the size have to do with it, if the price of a mortar on MT-LB is stupidly 10 times cheaper and the visibility of such a machine is much less. It is necessary to increase protection - what problems do you take and weld the armor, the tracked chassis will calmly pull ...
          As for the low security of MT-LB, this is all a moronic myth ... there’s 10mm circular armor of medium hardness at an angle. For example, on the BTR-80 7mm armor, on the BMP-2 16-18mm. Moreover, MT-LB is in service with many NATO countries.
      7. Winnie76
        Winnie76 31 July 2016 12: 36
        0
        Quote: qwert
        Now to the point. Sense on a 25-ton, huge Kurganets to put a mortar? MT-LB will be both easier and cheaper, and as a self-propelled mortar not a gram is no less effective.

        The point is that the mortar works from fairly short distances. And MTLB protection leaves much to be desired ...
      8. derik1970
        derik1970 1 August 2016 06: 45
        +1
        You are absolutely right, BMP BMPT - really turned out to be big country houses - targets, but damn it’s kind of well-protected, but big, but now there are no others like that ... Well, about the money, the oligarchs have it ... so who are they now give this money ... the oligarchs themselves the country itself ... hi
    2. inkass_98
      inkass_98 29 July 2016 07: 40
      +12
      Why Leontyev with his "However" is constantly published here laughing ? He's just from the "first channel" ...
      And gentlemen, the authors! Damn, well, honestly, at least hire an editor to check spelling and style. It seems that the article is good, but these shortcomings greatly spoil its perception.
    3. siberalt
      siberalt 29 July 2016 07: 57
      +8
      "They think that after the elections, life will immediately improve"
      The elections will be with a predetermined result. EP will win predictably. They will be voted for by military units awaiting sentencing in a pre-trial detention center, law enforcement officers, and workers' collectives (for fear of losing my job). This is already being done everywhere. Voter turnout will be small. But this is absolutely purple for the EP. We used to have a line "against all" in our ballots. And she gained almost the majority of votes. I propose to increase the voter turnout to 90% by including the column “against United Russia”. laughing But this is already from the realm of fiction.
      1. Malkor
        Malkor 29 July 2016 08: 25
        +20
        in 2008 he served in the army, was in a commission at the polling station: in the unit I have never heard that someone was forced to - at most the commander said you yourself understand who to vote for, in other units as far as I know it was the same. Everything was honest on the site, I did not see any stuffing, I counted the ballots myself. Spoiled, with indecent words and pictures were more than for Zyuganov. For Medvedev there were more than 90%, 5% for Zhirinovsky, the rest were dissenting and two other candidates. Therefore, I still do not understand when they say everything is rigged - you can go and become an observer and count the votes yourself.
        1. uskrabut
          uskrabut 29 July 2016 08: 54
          +1
          That's the trick of elective technology. The main thing is not to allow real competitors to vote. And here is the administrative resource to help: do not let it go on TV or let it go at an inconvenient time, you can inflate a scandal, you can fabricate a criminal case. Result - the right candidate gets the right amount of votes! Nothing to juggle.
          1. co-creator
            co-creator 29 July 2016 10: 43
            +5
            Quote: uskrabut
            That's the trick of elective technology. The main thing is not to allow real competitors to vote. And here is the administrative resource to help: do not let it go on TV or let it go at an inconvenient time, you can inflate a scandal, you can fabricate a criminal case. Result - the right candidate gets the right amount of votes! Nothing to juggle.

            So there are no real competitors for EP, just not. When someone appears, they immediately enter EP for a small share or flee to the US Embassy for cookies. So let EP steers.
            The Vedas, for example, was the Motherland at one time, and they could not "close" it until Rogozin started throwing nationalist slogans. Most likely they bought a man, but who is to blame? Is it power? So any government will seek to remove a competitor, and that's okay.
        2. Verdun
          Verdun 29 July 2016 11: 51
          -7
          Quote: Malkor
          in 2008 he served in the army, was in a commission at the polling station: in the unit I have never heard that someone was forced - the maximum commander said you yourself understand who to vote for

          And in the army you don't have to force anyone personally. Simply, if the voting results are "wrong", after a good march with full gear and several hours of combat on the parade ground under the scorching sun, the soldiers themselves will find the "wrong" voters and take action.
        3. Garri_
          Garri_ 29 July 2016 16: 20
          .
          .. I tell you: observers are kicked out during the recount, under various pretexts, ballots with those who voted against the United Russia are put in a pile with those who voted for the United Russia (and those who did not come to the vote), and the overwhelming majority for the United Russia is obtained. Then the observers sign ballots with the total number who voted for certain candidates and that's it, it's in the bag, so to speak. Those who come to pensioners ask whom they want to vote for, if the choice of a pensioner does not suit them (and older people almost always have poor vision), then they indicate where to put a tick and this is always where the EP stands. More or less like this.
          1. Petrik66
            Petrik66 1 August 2016 10: 01
            +1
            How does your "story" relate to the topic of the article?
          2. Petrik66
            Petrik66 1 August 2016 10: 01
            +1
            How does your "story" relate to the topic of the article?
      2. Two handed
        Two handed 29 July 2016 09: 23
        +13
        Neither in the army, nor during his time in the civil service did they speak for whom. The only thing I remember was once as a student, the administration of the hostel demanded to vote for the United Russia party, but this is from the field of tyranny. With these methods, they only aroused the outrage of students, only their sycophants, all sorts of informers and "careerists" from the trade union committee, went to vote at their instigations.
      3. EvgNik
        EvgNik 29 July 2016 09: 52
        +8
        Quote: siberalt
        I propose to increase the voter turnout to 90% by including the column “against United Russia”.

        Oleg, a very interesting proposal, but one thing: it will not be possible to increase it to 90%, at least to 50-60. Although, if there is a column "against the United Russia", 90% will come.
        1. co-creator
          co-creator 29 July 2016 10: 45
          +4
          Quote: EvgNik
          Quote: siberalt
          I propose to increase the voter turnout to 90% by including the column “against United Russia”.

          Oleg, a very interesting proposal, but one thing: it will not be possible to increase it to 90%, at least to 50-60. Although, if there is a column "against the United Russia", 90% will come.

          Who will be instead of EP or anarchy the mother of order? I am amazed where these idiots come from after what happened in Ukraine.
          1. EvgNik
            EvgNik 29 July 2016 11: 13
            +7
            Quotation: blooded man
            I am amazed where these idiots come from after what happened in Ukraine.

            Are you an oligarch, a millionaire? I am amazed at where such nonsense come from. You need to think with your own head, and not the one that is broadcasting from the box.
            1. co-creator
              co-creator 29 July 2016 12: 32
              +3
              Quote: EvgNik
              Quotation: blooded man
              I am amazed where these idiots come from after what happened in Ukraine.

              Are you an oligarch, a millionaire? I am amazed at where such nonsense come from. You need to think with your own head, and not the one that is broadcasting from the box.

              Yes, there are no downtime people. Unlike you, I think and understand that there can be no state without the AUTHORITY. Who will steer instead of EP? * What are the names of the party and people? Liberals? Zyuganov? Maybe someone from the people like Ukrainians on Maidan dreamed? You are my friend, idiot or provocateur.
              1. EvgNik
                EvgNik 29 July 2016 12: 46
                +9
                Quotation: blooded man
                I, unlike you, think and understand

                I didn’t drink with you so that you’re not, you still have to earn it, so you are not an ordinary person, a foundling of EP. You are a "simple man", you think that the United Russia is interested in the fate of the people of Russia, of course, they are interested in their own pocket, in extreme cases - the top of the pyramid. Try to drive across Russia and see how the people live. And with the EP at the head will live even worse.
                And it's up to you to decide for whom to vote - sorry, he said - think.
                1. co-creator
                  co-creator 29 July 2016 14: 39
                  +3
                  Quote: EvgNik
                  I didn’t drink with you so that you should earn it

                  With people who do not understand simple substances and do not always answer questions to You.

                  Quote: EvgNik
                  You are a "simple man", you think that the United Russia is interested in the fate of the people of Russia, of course, they are interested in their own pocket, in extreme cases - the top of the pyramid.

                  and who thinks? Well, call these people for whom the people need to vote? Well, I'm waiting.

                  Quote: EvgNik
                  And with EP at the head it will live even worse.
                  And it's up to you to decide for whom to vote - sorry, he said - think.

                  With whom will we live better? Gozman? Can we live well without deputies and the government? I don’t want to vote at all, well, I’ll say such nonsense that I won’t need to vote against everyone. Ho.khly on Madan have already galloped against the bloody panda and that they live well? Apparently the economy has gone up.

                  Quote: EvgNik
                  Foundling EP.

                  What is the conclusion? I asked a simple question, if you vote AGAINST EP and all then name the parties for which you need to vote FOR. Once campaigning against some, then name who is worthy to be in their place. I just think you will merge because your mind is like that of horses on the Maidan.
                  1. EvgNik
                    EvgNik 29 July 2016 16: 25
                    +3
                    Quotation: blooded man
                    if you vote AGAINST EP and all then name the parties for which you need to vote FOR

                    1. I wrote - think, or do you have a head to eat?
                    2. Did not look at your profile immediately, anonym, but it’s not accepted to communicate with anonymous on VO. Guilty, I’ll correct it.
                    1. co-creator
                      co-creator 29 July 2016 16: 39
                      +4
                      Quote: EvgNik
                      Quotation: blooded man
                      if you vote AGAINST EP and all then name the parties for which you need to vote FOR

                      1. I wrote - think, or do you have a head to eat?
                      2. Did not look at your profile immediately, anonym, but it’s not accepted to communicate with anonymous on VO. Guilty, I’ll correct it.

                      Merged, as expected. The gray matter is unable to process your information.

                      I can write anything on my profile, only how can this help you answer the questions I asked? You have long understood that you wrote nonsense and you just can’t admit that's all.
          2. MaksoMelan
            MaksoMelan 29 July 2016 19: 59
            +2
            As I understand it, the principle of Putin’s PLAN regarding EP. Stage 1 with those parties that were agreed did not work, especially since all were purchased (the same move and others). Stage 2, to create more or less a large batch of the majority in the dumma that will pull all that is needed, gain Aftarit, then the most important masses should be gained more so that it doesn’t reflect (people go for power after the cut and so on and so on and so on absent). Stage 3 - purification seems to begin: an attempt to make primaries, a serious plus while the rest of the parties are sleeping, expelling the frames tested by the party. And objectionable (bros, blatota, bureaucrats thieves merge quietly, and sometimes not quietly, if they do not want to sit on the priest evenly and take care of the good of the state). In principle, do not want to go to the party; go to the NF as a very active organization as they have revealed everything. Unlike some couch strategists, put everyone in or VOTE Against Everyone! I personally do not mind this point. But I am not an anarchist. And you want to plant, go to the Ministry of Internal Affairs to work. Other parties will be able to compete when a generation that doesn’t remember 90 changes. You don’t remember exactly (you can’t forget this and you must rewrite EVERYTHING in the ELZEN CENTER or create an alternative. I would suggest that the organizers of Lrka-Lukomorye take this into account if anyone remembers such an analogue of our Wikipedia - much cooler and in my opinion) or you can make an Internet version of this.
        2. Verdun
          Verdun 29 July 2016 20: 20
          +3
          Quote: EvgNik
          Although, if there is a column "against the United Russia", 90% will come.

          And according to the results of calculations, 100% of them will vote for EP. wassat Whatever you say, the Churov Number is a terrible force.
        3. Zaurbek
          Zaurbek 31 July 2016 09: 05
          +1
          Russian presidential republic. Who will choose EP or someone else, does not really matter
      4. co-creator
        co-creator 29 July 2016 10: 38
        +8
        Quote: siberalt
        I propose to increase the voter turnout to 90% by including the column “against United Russia”. But this is from the realm of fantasy.

        That is, you propose to live without deputies and hire you to write a law? or maybe the liberals with the Communists put in a thought? Before you write, you need to think, not how neighbors to ride without understanding who will come instead
      5. goose
        goose 29 July 2016 14: 05
        +2
        Quote: siberalt
        I propose to increase the voter turnout to 90% by including the column “against United Russia”.

        It does not help, small subsidized cities and regions, densely sit on EP. There are simply no others there, complete dependence on subventions and subsidies. It is an unshakable stronghold of the party - to create unemployment and to take away all the incomes of municipalities, as a result, a complete vassal dependence has turned out.

        The most striking example: Mordovia. Saransk. % of those who vote for any party in power, at least EP, at least Yabloko, at least communists, at least union of right-wing forces, will be more than 90%, like the Chechen Republic, as well as Kamchatka.
      6. RexMVDshny
        RexMVDshny 29 July 2016 22: 38
        +3
        Remember, the main thing is not who votes and not even how much, but most importantly who considers
      7. Lyubopyatov
        Lyubopyatov 30 July 2016 01: 04
        +1
        From the same field of fantasy: I propose to introduce the column "Against the capitalist ministers, For the domestic government!"
    4. skeptic
      skeptic 29 July 2016 12: 37
      +1
      Quote: aszzz888
      Especially the viewers of Channel 1 ...

      The article is good, relevant, thanks to the authors. But from the "viewers of the 1st channel", such a campaign will not wait.
      Brace yourself now!


      It is a pity that not everyone in the country understands this. Especially viewers of the "1 channel" ...

      Not that it is necessary to regret.
      It is necessary to show all the sharp points, but subject to thoughtful counterarguments. (for the enemy makes only carefully prepared provocations)

      The West uses tactics of pumping up, albeit absurd, but resonant stuffing with the use of frankly weak "counter-argumentators" as opponents, who by their "smears" work to strengthen ideas against Russia.
      Only really informed people with tactical and strategic thinking should be allowed to defend at the same time. (no fools).
    5. skeptic
      skeptic 29 July 2016 12: 38
      0
      Quote: aszzz888
      Especially the viewers of Channel 1 ...

      The article is good, relevant, thanks to the authors. But from the "viewers of the 1st channel", such a campaign will not wait.
      Brace yourself now!



      Not that it is necessary to regret.
      It is necessary to show all the sharp points, but subject to thoughtful counterarguments. (for the enemy makes only carefully prepared provocations)

      The West uses tactics of pumping up, albeit absurd, but resonant stuffing with the use of frankly weak "counter-argumentators" as opponents, who by their "smears" work to strengthen ideas against Russia.
      Only really informed people with tactical and strategic thinking should be allowed to defend at the same time. (no fools).
      1. Basarev
        Basarev 31 July 2016 10: 44
        +1
        The most important thing is to understand one thing: the current Russian oligarchic chaos does not have a political solution and the least painful way is to go to the compradors and their henchmen with a revolution and civil war. Otherwise, the Russians have no chance for the future.
  2. demiurg
    demiurg 29 July 2016 06: 48
    0
    A Kurganets have long been BMP? Or does the ability to install a 30mm module mean that an armored personnel carrier is becoming a BMP? Kurgan seems to be created for the same as the Stryker, but not for battle in the same row with tanks.
    1. domokl
      domokl 29 July 2016 06: 56
      +2
      Go to the factory’s website and read about this machine in the version with the installation of a tank gun ... There, by the way, there is also a name ...
    2. demiurg
      demiurg 29 July 2016 07: 11
      +5
      Oops Confused with Boomerang. I'm excusable, I'm a reader lol
      1. domokl
        domokl 29 July 2016 07: 26
        +3
        laughing tank guns are also placed on Bemerang and a light tank is obtained bullyWarheads are interchangeable
        1. demiurg
          demiurg 29 July 2016 07: 45
          +2
          We tried it already, even on the BTR-80. I did not like the military.

          But what are all the same new BMP huge. Even the case seems to be more than two meters high.
    3. Verdun
      Verdun 29 July 2016 11: 54
      +5
      Quote: demiurg
      Kurgan seems to be created for the same as the Stryker, but not for battle in the same row with tanks.

      A lightly armored infantry fighting vehicle could never fight alongside tanks. In general, it was initially believed that the BMP task was to deliver infantry to the battlefield and, along the route, support it with fire. And in battle infantry is still needed with legs, otherwise it is not needed nafig ...
      1. MaksoMelan
        MaksoMelan 29 July 2016 20: 06
        +1
        Duck all the same BMP - THE INFANTRY BATTLE MACHINE or armored personnel carrier - ARMORED TRANSPARTER? Two different quantities. And all the same, BMPs like with tanks, too, were allowed?
        1. Basarev
          Basarev 31 July 2016 10: 47
          0
          The most interesting thing is that obsolete weapons are still used on Boomerang and Kurganets: the basic version is the large-caliber machine gun that has completely exhausted itself, and also the Kazakh Utes. Although now even thirty-millimeter paper does not always cope. In mind, we need Baikal.
          1. would
            would 31 July 2016 12: 19
            0
            the basic option is the heavy machine gun that has completely exhausted itself, and the Kazakh Utes, moreover.


            Not a basic option, but only one of the options that was presented by the developer. And there is just no evidence that he would be considered for delivery to the army. And I have a personal opinion that this option was developed including for the needs of future foreign customers.

            . Although now even thirty-millimeter paper does not always cope. In mind, we need Baikal.


            The question is actually very controversial, but if you believe "Zvezda", then the AU220M can initially be mounted on these machines

            Externally, the AU-220M is a small tower with a 57 mm caliber quick-firing artillery mounted in its hull. The module can be mounted on all promising and modernized types of armored combat vehicles of the Russian Armed Forces. Among them - BMP 1,2 and 3 models, BTR-80, amphibious tank PT-76B and other weapons, as well as the Armata tank and the Kurganets-25 and Boomerang armored vehicleswhich are armed with remotely controlled combat modules.


            http://tvzvezda.ru/news/forces/content/201507081803-jdeq.htm
  3. Mavric
    Mavric 29 July 2016 06: 56
    +1
    Unification is our everything !!
  4. D. Dan
    D. Dan 29 July 2016 07: 21
    +7
    I don’t understand at all what a bad person can be dissatisfied with the fact that our army receives new combat vehicles ???
    1. qwert
      qwert 29 July 2016 07: 38
      -4
      Quote: D. Dan
      I don’t understand at all what a bad person can be dissatisfied with the fact that our army receives new combat vehicles ???

      Only those who believe that these machines are not entirely successful. They seem to be created kamk commercial projects, i.e. the main thing is to make money, and not to saturate the army with new cars. That's what makes cars big and expensive.
      1. MaksoMelan
        MaksoMelan 29 July 2016 14: 33
        +9
        You can’t build high-tech equipment cheaply. The Ukrainians tried to install a peephole from the intercom on their machine’s panzer so what? There are completely different tolerances. And we did not have any production of automation sights or computers at this level. For tanks delivered French sights. All kinds of nightlights and visors nonsense that in a hunting store about a million may cost and then a tank or infantry fighting vehicle. Plus resource reliability and the ability to withstand all this shaking. And the radars there to hell, not cheap too pleasure, and after all, few have such a thing. Let it be better big. I saw a video of a Syrian fighting off the wounded across the road. On the way to the backside, BMP 2 rides in front of it (another question is what rolls it there with passengers under RPG shells flying past) here, a shell flies into it from the right into the barrel at the level of the carrier. Something there damaged the engine or don’t know the transmission; I don’t remember what they said. In fact, the lucky ones were lucky. So at least under the stream would fall. I would rather sit in the Kurgan. After the box was shot down, he would not have hurt important details and he would calmly go on his own. And I had to drag this one. Substituting another carriage crew. If only the smoke let out. And small cars, perhaps, are good for the mountains, but for this they used airborne vehicles in Chechnya. Do you want cheaper? Get out the whole night and how to fight in the Second World War. Or like in Afghanistan at best.
    2. Dart2027
      Dart2027 29 July 2016 07: 41
      +3
      Quote: D. Dan
      what a bad person can displease

      Liberal.
      Human rights activist.
      General man.
      1. Blackgrifon
        Blackgrifon 29 July 2016 23: 54
        +2
        Quote: Dart2027
        Liberal.
        Human rights activist.
        General man.

        Liberofascist :)
        1. Basarev
          Basarev 31 July 2016 10: 49
          0
          The capitalist is damned.
          Smelly bourgeois.
  5. itr
    itr 29 July 2016 07: 25
    +1
    Damn I still can not understand! used to try to make cars for less, let's say so close to the ground that it would be difficult to get into a plane into a helicopter! right now, what is not a technique is Hercules phallic. in my opinion it is not reasonable. in general, with such dimensions and armaments should be more powerful. why does everyone think that they will fight with the Indians ???? and not with a regular army? these armored personnel carriers and infantry fighting vehicles against the gun are clearly zero. Damn and the goose’s are generally narrow! what will they drive on the asphalt? Damn width 4.8 meters how will they be transported on what ???????????????? with such dimensions and weight, more than one bridge will not pass (except on its own)
    1. ism_ek
      ism_ek 29 July 2016 09: 26
      +4
      Quote: itr
      Damn I still can not understand! used to try to make cars for less, let's say so close to the ground that it would be difficult to get into a plane into a helicopter!

      But the infantrymen were sitting exclusively on the armor ....
      Quote: itr
      these armored personnel carriers and infantry fighting vehicles against the gun are clearly zero
      Well, not really zero. The frontal armor will withstand the gun’s shot, and the ATGM will destroy the gun.
      Quote: itr
      Damn width 4.8 meters how to transport will be on what ????????????????

      Side protection is removed.
    2. ism_ek
      ism_ek 29 July 2016 09: 47
      0
      At one time, Serdyukov refused to buy the BMP-3. He and his subordinates said something like the following: "It is inconvenient to drive in the cockpit of this tank." Here our industry twisted and produced what "Putin's favorite" wanted
      1. goose
        goose 29 July 2016 14: 09
        +1
        Quote: ism_ek
        It’s inconvenient to ride in the cabin of this tank

        Puzo must have less. Another thing is that the troika is not a deuce, the car requires a different level of crew training.
        It is strange that Serdyukov was not impressed with the air conditioning and the toilet. And in the new version, it seems like an automatic transmission will appear.
    3. Skubudu
      Skubudu 29 July 2016 10: 00
      +10
      Quote: itr
      Damn I still can not understand! used to try to make cars for less, say so close to the ground, that it would be difficult to get into a plane into a helicopter

      And these Soviet BMPs and armored personnel carriers burned like torches from simple RPGs, burying entire departments of soldiers in themselves.
      Now finally they began to care about the security of personnel.
      1. qwert
        qwert 29 July 2016 11: 31
        +5
        Quote: Skubudu
        these Soviet BMPs and armored personnel carriers burned like torches from simple RPGs, burying entire departments of soldiers in themselves.
        Now finally they began to care about the security of personnel.

        Yeah, and the American M113, of the same release as the BMP-1, were directly a masterpiece and did not burn. American technology is also on fire, and even Abrams. And in general there is no invulnerable military equipment, so that the BBC and Non-Geographic there wouldn’t rub American technology with super superiority ...
        1. Dart2027
          Dart2027 29 July 2016 11: 45
          +1
          Quote: qwert
          no invulnerable military equipment

          Of course. But armored vehicles must be armored, otherwise why do they need it.
        2. MaksoMelan
          MaksoMelan 29 July 2016 20: 11
          0
          On the M113 they also rode on the roofs, they just put sandbags in the car’s interior so that when they could explode, they themselves could survive.
        3. would
          would 30 July 2016 15: 20
          +1
          For God's sake! Let the pendos (well, the literary word!) Ride anything, it is better for us that it would be worse. But for yourself you need to be better and you need to do so that we would not say "but the Americans ...", but what the Americans would say "but the Russians !!"
      2. ism_ek
        ism_ek 29 July 2016 13: 01
        0
        Quote: Skubudu
        And these Soviet BMPs and armored personnel carriers burned like torches from simple RPGs, burying entire departments of soldiers in themselves.
        Now finally they began to care about the security of personnel.
        The Kurganets, let alone Boomerang, has nothing fundamentally new in protecting the crew.
        1. MaksoMelan
          MaksoMelan 29 July 2016 20: 35
          +2
          Well, the reservation is all the same more suitable, mine seats, more space. And also, for sure, a protection system similar to a tank one or with its elements. Now everything should be thought to have active protection against ptura and RPG.
          1. ism_ek
            ism_ek 30 July 2016 00: 08
            +1
            Quote: MaksoMelan
            All the same, the reservation is more suitable, mine seats, more space. And also, for sure, a protection system similar to a tank one or with its elements. Now everything should be thought to have active protection against ptura and RPG.
            All of the above is on the latest versions of BMP 3
    4. qwert
      qwert 29 July 2016 11: 27
      -1
      Quote: itr
      Damn I still can not understand! used to try to make cars for less, let's say so close to the ground that it would be difficult to get into a plane into a helicopter! right now, what is not a technique is Hercules phallic. in my opinion it is not reasonable. in general, with such dimensions and armaments should be more powerful. why does everyone think that they will fight with the Indians ???? and not with a regular army? these armored personnel carriers and infantry fighting vehicles against the gun are clearly zero. Damn and the goose’s are generally narrow! what will they drive on the asphalt? Damn width 4.8 meters how will they be transported on what ???????????????? with such dimensions and weight, more than one bridge will not pass (except on its own)

      They used to try to make cars for war. And now...
      As Novozhilov said: "Why did Ily and Tushka fly before, but now the Superjet constantly has problems? Because we used to create airplanes, and the Superjet was originally a COMMERCIAL PROJECT, and commercial projects do not fly." That's all. Clear and clear.
      1. alexmach
        alexmach 30 July 2016 01: 44
        +5
        Well, think for yourself, where do the large dimensions come from?
        1. Mine protection, which means a higher landing. Is such protection necessary? for conflicts of low intensity - a must. For something like the Second World War ... well, I don’t know, the life of the fighters should be preserved anyway
        2. Hinged side screens - enhanced side protection. Is it an extra thing? + removed for transportation
        3. increased crew + more space inside. Why a place inside - well, a fighter can be in winter outfit and bulletproof vest. Something may be devoted to separation. there Arrow-Needle. Any modern means instead of an RPG in a grenade launcher + a set of grenades - armor-piercing and thermobaric. + compact mini drone. it’s necessary to carry it somewhere.

        BMP-3 is a pity of course, beauty. And the combat module there seems great to me. A 100mm gun is still not superfluous on the battlefield ...
  6. Per se.
    Per se. 29 July 2016 07: 48
    +15
    If you ask "BMP: Stupid Costs or the Right Strategy?", then, for a start, you need to understand what an BMP is, how and for what its concept was created. In the Soviet Union, the BMP-1 was created, a combat vehicle that occupied a niche between an armored personnel carrier and a tank, which, by definition, made it a highly maneuverable, versatile vehicle. For our airborne forces, the idea of ​​a universal combat vehicle has become especially relevant in the form of a BMD. Today BMD-4M and BMP-3 are the best universal vehicles in the world, completely unified and already being "platforms" for a whole family of military equipment based on them. On the basis of the T-72 and T-90 tanks, a huge family of combat vehicles has also been created, this is also a "platform" that has long existed without any PR. The creation of the BMPT, like the BMP, at one time, is the merit of our designers, for the first time in the world and here. BMPT, in conjunction with a heavy armored personnel carrier on a single tank base, is divided by functionality "BMP", but it was required to fence gardens, create a monster T-15. All for the sake of justifying the "platform" from "Armat". They killed an almost finished shock supertank T-95, all the salt and meaning of which was in the 152 mm cannon, which justified both the complexity of the tank and its price. What kind of "platform" can be on an expensive and complex base, just to saw the loot. So they are sawing. They stabbed the finished BTR-90, they are promoting another monster, the two-story "Boomerang". "Kurganets", what is he outstanding, the further he went from the freaks "Bradley" and "Warrior", which were never cool BMPs? It is not a matter of conservatism, not propaganda of "junk", which are neither the BTR-90, nor the BMP-3 and BMD-4M. The point is stupidity, if not betrayal, when defense enterprises, such as the Omsk Tank Plant, go bankrupt, refuse ready-made modern T-95s and "Black Eagle" and spend new billions on "platforms" that allegedly did not exist in our country before. Money, profit, and now the defense of the country is a profitable business for the bourgeoisie. We live at the expense of the Soviet margin of safety, without it we will learn from the French to make an armored personnel carrier, and the Yankees will be the authorities with their "Bradley" ... specializations, be it BMPT (specialized fire support) for the first line and a heavy armored personnel carrier (armored personnel carrier) for the second. BMPT and BMO-T here could well use a tank base from stocks of old T-15 tanks and the well-proven and proven T-72 base. But...
    1. demiurg
      demiurg 29 July 2016 08: 06
      +6
      The t-95 was abandoned due to its fantastic price. Although outwardly he looked more familiar to the Soviet design school.
      A black eagle is a tank without a future; you cannot endlessly upgrade the 70 platform of development years.
      But why they don’t use the hulls of tanks in storage, this is a good question.
      1. Nehist
        Nehist 29 July 2016 08: 28
        +2
        95 in comparison with Armata in the price it is like a Lada with a Lexus. So no need for price
        1. Per se.
          Per se. 29 July 2016 09: 43
          +7
          Quote: Nehist
          95 in comparison with Armata in the price it is like a Lada with a Lexus.
          You know, Alexander, the price of the T-95 tank was announced in the order of 450 million, the T-14 is a little cheaper. They refused from the powerful T-95 tank with a 152-mm gun, but only in the development of the "Armata", R&D and R&D, according to Vladimir Putin, they invested another 64 billion rubles, the T-14 tank itself (already with a 125-mm cannon) is estimated 400 million apiece. Moreover, if the refusal of the T-95 was motivated by its complexity of development by conscripts, then with the T-14 there is no talk of "conscripts" at all. Most importantly, the T-95 could go into production in 2012-2013. As for your passage to the Zhigul and Lexus, it is to make a "platform" on the basis of "Armata", exactly the same as on the basis of "Lexus" to make a "boot" for a small business, or a "loaf" for rural health center.
          1. Nehist
            Nehist 29 July 2016 16: 12
            +2
            You apparently misunderstood me! 95 and there are Lada at a price Armata Lexus
        2. qwert
          qwert 29 July 2016 11: 34
          +4
          Quote: Nehist
          95 in comparison with Armata in the price it is like a Lada with a Lexus. So no need for price

          More precisely as UAZ with Merce E-class.
          When it comes to dirt .... UAZ will be preferable. T-95, even the foreign-fighting machine of the Soviet (best in the world) tank school
      2. Per se.
        Per se. 29 July 2016 09: 55
        +8
        Quote: demiurg
        A black eagle is a tank without a future; you cannot endlessly upgrade the 70 platform of development years.
        "Black Eagle", Valery, this is a tank of the future (and not without a future), the fact that this future was not given to him is not the fault of its creators. On the Orel, not a crowded crew, but an automatic loader, was carried into a separate capsule, leaving the crew room and comfort with enhanced protection. "Eagle" is a fundamentally new tank, not a modernization of the T-80, but if we talk about the T-80, then its modernization potential was far from being exhausted, the T-80U-M1 "Bars" could be the best world tank today, surpassing and modifications of the T-90. The T-90 tank also has potential, however, for the native army, "economical" bourgeois prefer to see it in a more budgetary version (and, right there, songs about new "platforms", with the disposal of all old tank stocks).
        1. Blackgrifon
          Blackgrifon 30 July 2016 10: 47
          +2
          Quote: Per se.
          "Eagle" was carried into a separate capsule not by a crowded crew, but by an automatic loader, leaving the crew room and comfort with enhanced protection. "Eagle" is a fundamentally new tank, not a modernization of the T-80

          Black Eagle could allow us to upgrade our entire T-80 fleet.
          Regarding the "crowding" - and the layout of the T-14 and the layout of the "Eagle" have their pros and cons. Armata has the entire crew in the bow, but the crew must be soooooo lucky so that they all get killed / seriously wounded in one hit - judging by the frames of the movie Stars, the capsule for the crew is quite spacious. In addition, the armored capsule itself serves as an additional means of protecting the crew.
          Eagle, how many did not look at all available photos, 1 hatch. The location of the hatches for the commander and gunner is either hidden by the grid or they are absent.
          1. Per se.
            Per se. 1 August 2016 06: 35
            0
            Quote: Blackgrifon
            Eagle, how many did not look at all available photos, 1 hatch. The location of the hatches for the commander and gunner is either hidden by the grid or they are absent.
            On the Orel, Alexander, there are three hatches, one for the driver (hull) and two on the turret, everything is traditional. The diagram from the patent for the tank clearly shows its layout.
            1. Per se.
              Per se. 1 August 2016 06: 58
              +1
              The photo (clickable) shows the hatch on the left open on the tower.
      3. qwert
        qwert 29 July 2016 11: 32
        +3
        Quote: demiurg
        The t-95 was abandoned due to its fantastic price.

        In appearance, Armata times in 2 will be more expensive. It is both bigger and heavier, and it needs a dvigun more powerful, and a large area to protect. This is a dialectic; it cannot be cheaper.
        1. Nehist
          Nehist 29 July 2016 16: 13
          +1
          This is exactly what I had in mind when comparing prices for 95 and rebar, unfortunately I did not understand that. 95 could and should have been put into production
        2. bk316
          bk316 29 July 2016 21: 34
          +3
          Quote: qwert
          In appearance, Armata will be 2 times more expensive.

          By sight? Do you determine the cost by size?
          Armat was written to you at 50 lyam cheaper, and a supporter of 95 wrote.
          1. Basarev
            Basarev 31 July 2016 11: 06
            0
            It may be cheaper ... But at the cost of a terrible regression. The T-95 152-mm fool was standard, but the Armata no longer talk about her. The T-95 has a motor in front and across, and in Armata, the layout of the times is thirty-four - the engine is back along. The T-95 has an thirty-millimeter cannon as an additional weapon, and the armored PKT in Armata. And this kind of atavism in Armata is apparently invisible.
            1. would
              would 31 July 2016 12: 35
              +2
              . The T-95 152-mm fool was standard, but the Armata no longer talk about her.


              In my memory, it was announced a long time ago that the T-14 Armata was originally designed for the possibility of installing a 152mm gun, which even now can be painlessly installed "at the request of the customer". They don't talk about it because the Ministry of Defense preferred the 125 mm gun and for a reason. The firepower is, of course, greater, but the BC, while maintaining those dimensions, will have to be reduced by about 2 times. And the 125 is still a weapon. A 152mm fool will be installed, but on a smaller number of tanks.

              The T-95 has an thirty-millimeter cannon as an additional weapon, and the armored PKT in Armata.


              Yeah. The 30mm cannon is installed in a pair with the main gun, that is, it has a small proper angle of operation with such a firepower! If you need something, you have to turn the turret, and 30mm, with its firepower, actually asks for a separate turret, an anti-aircraft gun. And at the same time, since it has been installed, then you need additional space under the BC for 30mm. No, you give free rein to the second 152mm cannon, but then the question of necessity arises. And apparently this very need could not be found, and that is why from the additional armament of the T-14 "ancient" PKTM (other tanks have no less "ancient") and 12.7 "Kord".

              In short, solid "atavisms".
              1. Per se.
                Per se. 1 August 2016 08: 05
                0
                Quote: rait
                Yeah. 30mm gun mounted in a pair with the main gun, that is, it has a small working angle with such fire power!
                Characterizing the additional armament of the T-95, it should be noted the 30-mm 2A42 cannon, which could be used as an alternative to the excessive consumption of the main ammunition, the gun was mounted in the combat module along with a 152 mm gun. At the same time, the automatic gun had its own guidance drives, both vertically and partially horizontally, that is, in a certain sector, the gun could be used independently. It was assumed and machine gun armament one (two) 7.62 mm machine gun (14,5 mm machine gun), as well as ATGM. In the photo (clickable), the 30 mm cannon is seen from the side of the turret. The main armament of the T-95 consisted of a 152-mm 2A83 cannon (developed by the OKB of Plant No. 9 and VNIITM). The gun had an initial speed of an armor-piercing sub-caliber projectile of 1980 m / s and the ability to launch a guided missile through the barrel, the range of a direct shot was 5100 meters, and the armor penetration of the BPS reached 1024 millimeters of steel homogeneous armor. The ammunition load was 36-40 rounds, the types of ammunition: BPS, OFS, KUV. The T-95 tank was called "Russian Tiger" and "Abrams kaput", one hit of a 152 mm projectile would be enough for any modern and promising tank of a potential enemy. This already made it possible to use less ammunition, in addition, it was the 30 mm gun that made it possible to save the "main caliber", destroying secondary targets. With a 125 mm gun, 2-3 T-90s are more expedient and profitable than T-14s with a similar caliber. The T-95 was conceived as a reinforcement tank, a super tank, and not a "platform" (although, if desired, other equipment could be made on its basis). The whole point of the armored capsule was that the entire space of the turret was given under the powerful 152 mm cannon, without this it makes sense to drive the crew into a cramped capsule, and, I repeat, here then the solution for the "Black Eagle" is preferable.
      4. Dulat
        Dulat 31 July 2016 22: 03
        0
        Everything can be infinitely modernized, it’s like evolution in nature, perfectly adapting to the conditions and not having too much
  7. The comment was deleted.
  8. Zaurbek
    Zaurbek 29 July 2016 09: 09
    0
    You also need to consider that when starting up a series of similar products, new engines, gearboxes, alloys appear .....
    1. Cat man null
      Cat man null 29 July 2016 09: 13
      +1
      Quote: Zaurbek
      You also need to consider that when starting up a series of similar products, new engines, gearboxes, alloys appear .....

      Enchanting nonsense:

      - "new alloys" appear long before "new engines" and "new gearboxes"
      - all this, taken together, appears long before the "launch of the product in the series"

      Somehow yes
      1. qwert
        qwert 29 July 2016 11: 36
        +2
        Quote: Cat Man Null
        - "new alloys" appear long before "new engines" and "new gearboxes"
        - all this, taken together, appears long before the "launch of the product in the series"
        Somehow

        Not so in aviation. New alloys are created according to the requirements of designers creating a new generation machine.
        1. Cat man null
          Cat man null 29 July 2016 14: 42
          +1
          Quote: qwert
          Quote: Cat Man Null
          - "new alloys" appear long before "new engines" and "new gearboxes"
          - all this, taken together, appears long before the "launch of the product in the series"
          Somehow

          Not so in aviation. New alloys are created according to the requirements of designers creating a new generation machine.

          - what appears earlier - a new alloy, or a machine "in iron" (I am silent about the "series")? IMHO is still an alloy ...
          - requirements -> alloy -> machine using this alloy yes
          - about "according to the requirements of designers" - I fully agree. And so not only in aviation, we remember about armored steel for Armata (I know the chela who dealt with it directly. My classmate belay )
          1. Dulat
            Dulat 31 July 2016 22: 11
            0
            No need to reveal his classmate
            1. Cat man null
              Cat man null 31 July 2016 22: 49
              0
              Quote: Dulat
              No need to reveal his classmate

              - I have them for 1000 people, nicho right? wink
              - and then - the thing is the past already .. the steel is developed, the person in other matters already ..

              In short - all Coca-Cola, don’t worry laughing
  9. Vadim237
    Vadim237 29 July 2016 09: 16
    0
    Rather, the MO will choose only one BMP or T 15 or Boomerang.
    1. Skubudu
      Skubudu 29 July 2016 10: 10
      0
      Quote: Vadim237
      Rather, the MO will choose only one BMP or T 15 or Boomerang.

      And most likely it will be Kurganets, unfortunately
      T-15 is expensive for BMP
      For the infantry it would be better to take the T-15 into service
      1. goose
        goose 29 July 2016 14: 18
        -1
        Quote: Skubudu
        T-15 is expensive for BMP

        This is a real palliative. As I saw "it" at the parade, .... 400 million to take away the squad of soldiers ???
        Yes, with this money you can hire a regiment of bombers, and they will clean the area of ​​the offensive so that it remains to walk in shorts and a T-shirt, waving a fan.
        1. bk316
          bk316 29 July 2016 21: 39
          +4
          Quote: goose
          hire a regiment of bombers,

          Where will you hire them? Well this is not Starcraft where mercenaries are always at hand and do not end there.
          Do you know how much one Su-34 costs?
        2. Vadim237
          Vadim237 29 July 2016 21: 53
          0
          The conflict in Ukraine showed that the thickness and strength of the armor, again came in first place.
        3. Blackgrifon
          Blackgrifon 30 July 2016 10: 52
          0
          Quote: goose
          This is a real palliative. As I saw "it" at the parade, .... 400 million to take away the squad of soldiers ???
          Yes, with this money you can hire a regiment of bombers, and they will clean the area of ​​the offensive so that it remains to walk in shorts and a T-shirt, waving a fan.

          Unscientific fiction ...
          For 400 million, even one squadron of modern piston light attack aircraft cannot be bought. In addition, aviation does not win wars - until the infantry with armored vehicles is fixed on the ground - this is enemy land.
          And then, do you even know how much it costs to fly one bomber? The BTG raid is much cheaper and (if competent and trained officers and soldiers) more efficient. Moreover, the idea of ​​combat modules is being actively promoted in the Armed Forces - in fact, a regular tactical group of armored vehicles and infantry has already been formed, instead of the classic tank and motorized rifle full-time uniform units.
        4. philosopher
          philosopher 31 July 2016 05: 02
          +1
          And if this squad consists entirely of your relatives, and the bombers will not raise because of the high density of the enemy's air defense, send your men in shorts too? For combat vehicles, the concept of "overpayment" for safety does not exist at all, and whoever does not understand this will lose. Ask Israel: which is better - to lose the Merkava 4 or the tank crew?
          It just so happened that couch experts are better versed in military equipment and combat training, and fans on TV screens play soccer better than any team.
      2. domokl
        domokl 29 July 2016 14: 34
        +1
        I disagree ... It is the T-15 that will be added to the T-14. Otherwise, I don't see any sense in the 14s themselves. "Naked" vehicles without infantry and support, you know, is fraught with any reservation. I did it and they won’t say thank you ..
      3. Vadim237
        Vadim237 29 July 2016 21: 49
        +1
        Yes, they’ll just rather accept the T 15 - since there is a unified platform with a tank and better security, and taking a Kurgan does not make sense, since there is a wheeled analogue - BTR, in fact, also BMP - Boomerang. Kurgan will be in great demand in the foreign market.
        1. Blackgrifon
          Blackgrifon 30 July 2016 00: 01
          +1
          Quote: Vadim237
          and taking Kurganets does not make sense, since there is a wheeled analogue - BTR, in fact, also BMP - Boomerang. Kurgan will be in great demand in the foreign market.

          T-15 does not swim. And we have far from a desert - swamps, rivers, streams, etc. even in the steppe regions.
          Kurganets is a floating infantry fighting vehicle + air transport. But due to only medium armor.
          1. alexmach
            alexmach 30 July 2016 02: 13
            +1
            + Kurganets again cheaper - you can make a mass series. He is the most and will be the main BMP.

            T-15 - will be, but the mass opinion.

            The boomerang is, firstly, unfinished, it lags behind in technical readiness, and secondly, a caterpillar is preferable to a wheel at a European theater.
            1. Blackgrifon
              Blackgrifon 30 July 2016 10: 57
              0
              Quote: alexmach
              in a European theater, however, the caterpillar is preferable to the wheel.

              You are right, but there is still the south and the Caucasus, and wheeled armored vehicles are needed there.
      4. Blackgrifon
        Blackgrifon 30 July 2016 10: 56
        0
        Quote: Skubudu
        And most likely it will be Kurganets, unfortunately
        T-15 is expensive for BMP
        For the infantry it would be better to take the T-15 into service

        Not this way. Judging by open sources: T-15 milking individual compounds / units. And Kurganets is for most motorized riflemen. The first and second - to the west and east. The rest - Boomerang and to the south and Central Asian direction.
  10. this
    this 29 July 2016 09: 22
    0
    Why "Boomerang" is big, otherwise it has no protection against RPGs, the old armored personnel carriers are not called a mass grave for nothing, nor protection from mines without a wedge-shaped high bottom. So it turns out that for modern wars and conflicts, with their huge saturation with all kinds of anti-tank weapons, armor is much more important than size, and old armored personnel carriers and infantry fighting vehicles are by no means small cars.
    Why is the T-72 not converted into a BMP, and is it possible at all, its platform will pull reinforced mass, what kind of alteration of the hull and components of a tank is needed to make a BMP out of it, can it be much more difficult to technically convert it into a BMP than the T-55? Yes, and something must be stored in warehouses, the country is huge.
    1. goose
      goose 29 July 2016 14: 20
      +1
      Quote: tohoto
      The old armored personnel carriers and infantry fighting vehicles are by no means small cars.

      BRDM-2, BTR-40, BMP-1 and 2, MTLB are really small cars.

      When compared with the BTR-70-80-90, - yes, there is already a barn.
    2. domokl
      domokl 29 July 2016 14: 36
      +2
      Quote: tohoto
      Why T-72 will not be converted to BMP

      And why will these BMPs be needed? T-14 and T-15 s in which case can be "donors" for each other, and 72 and 14?
      And then, the T-72 will be in service for many more years. The tank is far from ordinary.
      1. Blackgrifon
        Blackgrifon 30 July 2016 11: 00
        +1
        Quote: domokl
        And why will these BMPs be needed? T-14 and T-15 s in which case can be "donors" for each other, and 72 and 14?

        There is BMO - this is a heavy armored personnel carrier for flamethrowers. Part of the T-72 is being upgraded to the level of the T-72B3 "Burevestnik". And there is a chance that the Ministry of Defense will nevertheless decide to upgrade part of the 72k to the level of BMPT with a universal 57 mm cannon, as a heavy vehicle for fire support for infantry and tanks in urban environments and as a defender from drones.
  11. Tsoy
    Tsoy 29 July 2016 09: 23
    +5
    And what the Star differs in objectivity? They have headlines on the site no worse than VGTRK. Channel One, Russia, or forgive the NTV, in recent years 2-3 have turned into a brain drain. I do not watch TV for years 7, which I advise everyone else.
    1. Kenneth
      Kenneth 29 July 2016 09: 48
      0
      Respected. If you do not see how you can know and what right you have the right to advise. Or you haven’t read from the series but are outraged.
      1. Tsoy
        Tsoy 29 July 2016 12: 43
        +4
        Quote: Kenneth
        what right do you have advise.


        Seriously?

        This is a recommendation, not a tip. If you want to live in the illusory world, please watch federal television.
        1. Kenneth
          Kenneth 29 July 2016 17: 14
          -2
          How do you know
          Your opinion on this subject is negligible because you yourself are not in the know.
  12. wanderer_032
    wanderer_032 29 July 2016 09: 36
    +1
    New universal armored vehicle platforms are needed. All three. Each of them was created taking into account the specifics of what types and types of troops, as well as in which specifically mechanized formations, these machines will be used.
  13. Kenneth
    Kenneth 29 July 2016 09: 46
    +1
    The thesis about a very expensive super soldier was especially pleased. Perhaps these can’t be fought. Suddenly they’ll kill. Again, it seems like draftees to fight if that. And no less pleased was the theme of equipping with different warheads almost on the battlefield. The author probably completed the combined arms. We will carry blocks for each armored personnel carrier. Together with a different range of ammunition. Ukrainians also make blocks and armored personnel carriers are different. Only we wisely call it the struggle to cut the budget.
    1. domokl
      domokl 29 July 2016 14: 42
      +1
      Hmm ... The weekend has begun? drinks
      And on the issue of dear soldier. The training of a special forces officer costs several million rupees for our native state. The pilot is even more expensive. And then you cited as an example Ukraine a long time ago. So they fought in the Patriotic War. An appeal, three days for mastering a rifle or machine gun and into battle. AKM is therefore still popular in the world because it is designed for 3 training days.
      And in blocks. How many cars in the 14 year were thrown because of nonsense? That one, that the other. Damage is trifle, but there are no spare parts.
      1. Lord blacwood
        Lord blacwood 29 July 2016 15: 46
        +1
        And in blocks. How many cars in the 14 year were thrown because of nonsense? That one, that the other. Damage is trifle, but there are no spare parts.

        That is why universal combat platforms were created on the basis of which tanks, infantry fighting vehicles, armored vehicles and other types of military equipment are created. For example, our new T-14 tank, T-15 BMP, and the Coalition-SV self-propelled guns were created on the basis of the Armata universal combat platform. This will greatly facilitate repair and maintenance.
      2. Kenneth
        Kenneth 29 July 2016 17: 25
        +1
        Okay, you're right. Indeed, a little bit of unification of the gut can be replaced by removing junk in the mobile reserve. I just do not like the idea of ​​a tank and heavy armored personnel carrier separately. Jews are well combined in the Merkava.
        1. KaPToC
          KaPToC 29 July 2016 22: 09
          +1
          Jews did not combine anything. Merkava carries either people or ammunition.
        2. Blackgrifon
          Blackgrifon 30 July 2016 11: 12
          +2
          Quote: Kenneth
          the idea of ​​a tank and heavy armored personnel carrier separately. Jews are well combined in the Merkava.

          Nothing like this. Merkava is able to take 2-3 people on board as an exception. And infantry are transported by the TBTR based on mercans and centurions with 55mi (if they still remain) and various armored vehicles.
    2. Blackgrifon
      Blackgrifon 30 July 2016 11: 09
      +2
      Quote: Kenneth
      The thesis about a very expensive super soldier was especially pleased. Perhaps these can’t be fought. Suddenly they’ll kill. Again, it seems like draftees to fight if that.

      Even an ordinary lieutenant is a very expensive specialist. Several million were spent on his training.
      The soldier, too, is not cheap. Soldiers and officers must be educated, trained, provided, and in the event of their death, this is grief for the family and new significant costs for the state.
      The cost of an officer, generally like good wine, grows over the years and experience - the average young lieutenant cannot be compared with a captain or major, not to mention senior officers.
      Also with the younger L / C: a conscript who had just been called up - can do nothing and cannot compare with a one-year-old conscript, not to mention the contract sergeant.
      So the author is right - any member of the main powers is valuable.
  14. Izotovp
    Izotovp 29 July 2016 09: 54
    +1
    Evil is active. They did not manage to save from one of the most powerful banks UVZ, as I was informed that the Kurganmashzavod was bankrupt.
    1. Mairos
      Mairos 29 July 2016 12: 21
      0
      “Accountants” should not be allowed to manage the economy and the country. They see nothing but money - they are blinkered.
    2. domokl
      domokl 29 July 2016 14: 44
      0
      The second year this nonsense is coming. UVZ in favor. They killed the T-80 in Omsk, now Kurgan is next in turn
      1. wanderer_032
        wanderer_032 29 July 2016 18: 24
        0
        Quote: domokl
        Ditched T-80 in Omsk


        It is sad to admit it, but the T-80 tanks are very expensive to operate. First of all, because of the gas turbine engine.

        But slipped in the media infa that:


        The T-80 tank is being modernized with the "Relikt" and the "Sosnoy-U" Omsk gunsmiths have taken up the modernization of the T-80BV tank.
        https://rg.ru/2016/07/14/reg-sibfo/tank-t-80-moderniziruiut-reliktom-i-sosnoj-u.

        html
        1. Blackgrifon
          Blackgrifon 30 July 2016 11: 13
          0
          Quote: wanderer_032
          The T-80 tank is being modernized with the "Relikt" and the "Sosnoy-U" Omsk gunsmiths have taken up the modernization of the T-80BV tank.

          T-80 is fully transferred to storage. Modernization does not shine for them.
          1. Blackgrifon
            Blackgrifon 30 July 2016 18: 14
            +2
            Quote: wanderer_032
            T-80s are very expensive to operate. First of all - because of the gas turbine engine

            But they are very quiet and extremely fast. A friend said that they were even afraid to turn them on for the latest program - too quick :)
            1. TSOOBER
              TSOOBER 31 July 2016 21: 36
              0
              http://www.btvt.narod.ru/1/80u.htmые танки Т-80УЕ-1 и Т-80УА приняты на вооружение России в 2005 году, модернизация Т-80УЕ-1 предполагает вывести танки Т-80БВ на уровень, превышающий Т-80У путем установки башни танка Т-80УД находящегося на вооружении Российской армии (Указом Президента РФ №435 от 16.04.2005). ОЗТМ сейчас проводят модернизацию Т-80БВ до уровня Т-80УЕ-1 включающем установку башни от утилизированных танков Т-80УД (аналогичная Т-80У), усовершенствованной СУО 1А45-1 и ряда других усовершенствований. В целом уровень модернизированного Т-80УЕ-1 будет соответствовать современному Т-90 и несколько превосходить Т-80У. Естественно эта модернизация стоит значительно дороже, чем капитальный ремонт Т-80У. Т-80У мордернизирубтся до уровня Т-80УА.
              The idea of ​​modernization of the T-80BV: at present, the resource of the chassis of the T-80UD tank, including the engine (the production of which is carried out in Ukraine) and the systems serving it, has been exhausted, and the restoration is associated with high costs for the purchase of components and systems from the Ukrainian side. At the same time, the tower of the T-80UD tank with armament and its servicing systems has a large reserve in terms of resource and advantages in protection and firepower compared to the outdated T-80BV turret.
              The modernization includes the improvement of the LMS to the level 1A45-1, including the inclusion of a modern thermal imaging sight (TVP) of Belarusian-French production. The lead developer of Spetsmash OJSC together with OKBTM.
              The upgraded 1A45-1 was adopted by the T-80UA and T-80UE-1 tanks by Decree of the President of the Russian Federation No. 435 of 16.04.2005.
              The complex provides:
              improving the accuracy of the fire control system of the gunner’s day sight, which reduced the stabilization errors of weapons in two planes of expanding the range of sensors taking into account deviations of the shooting conditions from normal;
              reduction of targeting errors by modernizing the ballistic computer, in which the "Auto-tuning" mode is implemented, which reduces the exit of the aiming mark in two planes, the mark of the sight is controlled depending on the own speed of the tank and the launch angle of the tower;
              reduction of errors in calculating the aiming angles and lateral lead by a ballistic computer by taking into account the systematic error of the range finder and bending of the gun barrel during shooting, automatic calculation of the wear of the gun barrel during shooting and automatically taking into account changes in the expanded range of parameters of the shooting conditions;
              the use of a control and adjustment panel for a ballistic computer, which provides optimal tuning of the parameters of the modernized fire control system and zeroing of electrical signals when reconciling the commander’s device;
              inputting additional signals from the instruments to the ballistic computer to select an algorithm for the weapon stabilizer to develop aiming angles and lateral anticipation depending on firing day, night, and in DOUBLE mode;
              installation of an image intensifier tube (electron-optical converter) of the third generation using a new semiconductor matrix: with direct image transfer, microchannel amplification, with an integrated power source, with a light protection circuit, with automatic brightness control. The image intensifier tube has a photocathode with a sensitivity of 700 μA / lm (instead of 450 μA / lm) and a glow screen on the fiber-optic element. This increases the range of target recognition (from 1200 to 1800 meters).
              Instead of a sight based on an image intensifier tube, a Plissa thermal imaging sight can be installed.
              The upgraded 1A45-1 was adopted by the T-80UA and T-80UE-1 tanks
          2. TSOOBER
            TSOOBER 31 July 2016 21: 24
            0
            where it is possible to read and where what info on it was?
        2. TSOOBER
          TSOOBER 31 July 2016 21: 33
          0
          They are put on the T-80B / BV chassis in the process of upgrading to the T-80UE.
          Modernization is not massive - according to some reports, the total number of T-80UE / UA is near the battalion. At least it was .. Honestly dragged from GA
  15. Nick1953
    Nick1953 29 July 2016 09: 58
    +2
    Quote: inkass_98
    , at least hire an editor to check your spelling and style. It seems that the article is good, but these shortcomings greatly spoil its perception.

    From the texts of modern scribblers jarring. Even with my 'Russian' top three from 69 ...
  16. The comment was deleted.
  17. Unclean
    Unclean 29 July 2016 11: 28
    +1
    I liked the article, the authors plus. And as for the height, this is so that in order to increase protection against anti-tank mines and with various other means of destruction various additional protective equipment must be fought, from active protection to mufflers with radio detonation. In general, everything is new, especially in the military sphere always always provokes different opinions. It is necessary to listen and draw conclusions or additions.
  18. Dimon19661
    Dimon19661 29 July 2016 11: 47
    0
    I have only one question for the authors of the article, what is the MARINE ANTENNA GUN ???
    1. goose
      goose 29 July 2016 14: 23
      0
      Quote: Dimon19661
      What is MARINE ANTI-GUN Cannon

      The author, apparently, had in mind the 57-mm land-based S-60 under the sea gun.

      The only naval gun in the ground forces was on the ZSU-30. Really sea anti-aircraft gun.
  19. Operator
    Operator 29 July 2016 12: 07
    -5
    T-14, T-15, "Kurganets" and "Boomerang" are demo versions (such as scare potential opponents).

    The series will go new cars that use the experience of the demo, but made in the tradition of the Soviet armored school - compact and cheap.

    The money spent on the demo went to modernize enterprises and train developers.
    1. Mairos
      Mairos 29 July 2016 12: 25
      +8
      You cannot make a well-protected car with acceptable habitability compact and cheap. And enough, finally, to sing hosanna to "tarpaulin boots" just because they were Soviet. The Soviet BTT was compact, well armed (with the exception of the BMP-1) and not very well protected. Habitability - it sucks, whoever served on it in the heat and cold - they will understand.
      1. Operator
        Operator 29 July 2016 14: 03
        -4
        The Russian Army does not need German "Muses".

        Active defense + armor against small-caliber guns = future BMP.

        It is not necessary to attract the habitability of BMPs by the ears - for a person, a volume of one cubic meter of space 1,5 meter high is quite sufficient. Eleven people - respectively 11 cubic meters The BMP case with approximate dimensions of 3x6x1,5 meters has a volume of 27 cubic meters, i.e. there is plenty of room not only for the motorized rifle squad, but for the engine, transmission, fuel and track niches. Armament and KAZ - in a remote combat module.

        Taking into account the clearance of 0,5 m, the dimensions of the future BMP will be 3 m wide, 6 meters long and 2 meters high along the roof of the hull - compare with 9 meters long and 4,8 meters wide 2 meters high T-15 "Barberry".

        The reserve volume of the Barberry hull (excluding caterpillar niches) is 86 cubic meters, weight is 50 tons, security level is 0,57 t / cubic meter. With the same level of security, the weight of a compact BMP would be 27x0,57 = 15 tons, i.e. at the level of the Soviet BMP-2.
        1. Mairos
          Mairos 29 July 2016 14: 40
          +8
          Did you ride in the "boxes"? When the heat is 40 plus and under the armor is even worse? Do you think that 11 people should crouch in the building in the space you accounted for in any climate? And what about backpacks, equipment, weapons and ammo, and what if the unit goes without a convoy for a week? And the anti-mine bottom? What are 2 meters on the roof? You can probably sit in your compact BMP for half an hour, but making a march is not hotzza at all. Habitability is a lot! When you fall out of the box like a boiled crawfish (or like a frozen cutlet), then you're a shitty fighter out of you. Or are we going to ride on armored vehicles from above, in view of its ergonomic ugliness and weak security? Compactness for you .. the Soviet school .. Maybe that's enough?
          1. Operator
            Operator 29 July 2016 18: 31
            0
            You drove in an air-conditioned crossover cabin - there’s just a cubic meter for passengers and a driver and the ceiling height is under 1,5 meters. You will travel twelve hours, halt at 30-60 minutes and another twelve hours of travel.

            An airborne compartment with the same volume for each motorized rifle, with heat insulation and air conditioning, using fenders to accommodate unloading - here’s your BMP in 3x6x2 meters.

            The mine floor is 5 cm foam aluminum to protect the feet from high-speed deformation of the bottom. Plus, shock-absorbing suspension of individual crew and landing seats to protect against vertebral fracture. Everything.
            1. philosopher
              philosopher 31 July 2016 17: 35
              0
              Are you an armored vehicle developer for an hour? So many ideas disappear for nothing.
        2. Mairos
          Mairos 29 July 2016 14: 46
          +3
          And where does the "Mouse"? And the "Tiger" for 1943 was an excellent tank and burned our T-34-76 head-on from 2 kilometers, but they did not hit him in the forehead even 500 meters. Why do we have so many people eager to do "as before" at any cost? It is necessary to take good things from the past, and not drag everything in a row. You still offer breeches and boots to return .. and overcoats with field caps. Ugh..
          1. Operator
            Operator 29 July 2016 18: 33
            0
            Since it’s just you who drag armor and the corresponding dimensions of armored vehicles from the past, while there is already a modern, compact and lightweight solution - KAZ.
        3. MaksoMelan
          MaksoMelan 29 July 2016 15: 06
          0
          There is Kurgan on it
        4. Navigator Basov
          Navigator Basov 5 October 2016 00: 26
          0
          And here they brought this barberry wassat
      2. goose
        goose 29 July 2016 14: 26
        0
        Quote: Mairos
        Habitat - sucks, who served on it in the heat and cold - will understand.

        I disagree about the BMP-3. enough space. And the BMP-2 is quite normal. Here are the tanks - yes, you get in, as in a well-chosen "thermo" or stiletto heels.
        1. Mairos
          Mairos 29 July 2016 14: 56
          +1
          The armament composition of 2 is not bad - I agree. And the habitability at the level of "edinika" remained. Autumn-spring is still so-and-so, and summer heat or winter is atas. Especially in hot areas.
        2. Mairos
          Mairos 29 July 2016 15: 18
          0
          I did not serve the BMP-3 - I can’t argue. )))
      3. domokl
        domokl 29 July 2016 14: 46
        +2
        Well, yes ... And the armor ... So from Afghanistan went riding on the armor. Better a bullet than a mass grave of infantry
        1. Mairos
          Mairos 29 July 2016 15: 12
          +3
          Ugums .. rode on armor and died from landmines, which were placed on the sidelines even 2-3 meters away (from shells and unexploded bombs). Many people theorists - they themselves did not "eat porridge" but vyskzyvat their own IMHO. I am a complete layman in naval affairs - I will be silent, but about the reconnaissance infantry - I have the right to open my mouth, since I have experienced a lot on myself.
    2. Lord blacwood
      Lord blacwood 29 July 2016 16: 03
      +1
      The series will go new cars that use the experience of the demo, but made in the tradition of the Soviet armored school - compact and cheap.

      And what does it mean "in the traditions of the Soviet armored school", or T-14 and T-15, according to you, were not created by our designers. And why in the USA and Europe are they so afraid of the T-14. Yes, the Soviet armored school was good, but it's outdated. And the T-14, T-15, Kurganets and Boomerang were created based on the realities of modern warfare.
  20. Mairos
    Mairos 29 July 2016 12: 15
    +3
    Quote: qwert
    ...
    Now to the point. Sense on 25 the tons, huge Kurgan to put a mortar? MT-LB will be both easier and cheaper, and as a self-propelled mortar not a gram is no less effective. About the Boomerang. Does anyone bother size? The meaning of such a motor home? Of course, I am for a strong Army and for its technical updating, but let me express my opinion:
    If the designers of the SOVIET school created these cars, then we would have got cars of the same security and firepower, but one and a half times smaller in weight and size (respectively, and price). It is unreasonable to abandon the workflow of the original original BTT design school, especially considering that thanks to it we have been leaders in armored vehicles for many years. There was no need to imitate Western schools, creating machines that were monstrous in size and solving problems in the forehead by increasing weight.

    The point is in the unification of the base machine. MTLB will still serve, of course, but it is quite possible to put a 120-mm samovar on the Kurganets. And how many BC you can download! And what protection is calculated on the march and during counter-battery combat! So it's worth using it as a self-propelled mortar. And stop praying for the "old school" - did you ride a lot on old armor? I am a lot. I am generally silent about the BMP-1 cannon - it is rare. Habitability and ergonomics are disgusting in all Soviet armored vehicles. In the Union, so many different modifications of the BTT were produced to keep everyone busy, and not all samples were successful.
    1. MaksoMelan
      MaksoMelan 29 July 2016 16: 54
      +1
      Moreover, for all these motorcycle leagues, BMPT, BMP, tanks, and other garbage tank variants you need a bunch of different spare parts. A new line allows you to reduce the variety of needs.
  21. Tektor
    Tektor 29 July 2016 12: 40
    +2
    What are BMP for? To increase the mobility of personnel. Dot.
    The T-15 is the best infantry fighting vehicle in history, only very good and expensive, which means that it’s not enough for everyone. Kurganets-25 - improving the quality of previous BMPs, but not impressive. The main advantage is cross-country ability !!! It is because of this quality that it will be in demand in the troops. Boomerang - the concept is based on mine protection, which makes it an order of magnitude more attractive than Kurganets, especially when comparing comfort.
    And from this a very simple conclusion: they are all needed. Because each has features that make them unique and necessary.
    1. Parsec
      Parsec 29 July 2016 13: 27
      +1
      Quote: Tektor
      What are BMP for? To increase the mobility of personnel. Dot.


      A comma, and fire support infantry in battle.

      The armored personnel carrier from the name is audible - transportation, as well as BMP - infantry fighting vehicle.

      Cannon, machine gun (s), ATGM - is it all to increase weight and increase prices do you think?

      Strategists from the keyboard, but how decisively.
      1. Mairos
        Mairos 29 July 2016 14: 59
        0
        I agree with you. But really, there’s a lot more)) And I had to sleep in them))
    2. MaksoMelan
      MaksoMelan 29 July 2016 17: 03
      0
      Btr not bmp. I would see how you went to a place where you could use a wheeled vehicle to drive hp on a harp on the roads just because it is passable. For example, all gisilikovaya equipment destroys the road that no armored personnel carrier or other wheeled drive will pass. And on the march they are bred on different roads. A gusl is needed for Off-Road. Btr bring to take and bmp to fight. Roughly speaking, an armored personnel carrier is a transport with a machine gun and not a tank with infantry.
  22. denchik1977
    denchik1977 29 July 2016 16: 09
    +3
    All those "smart people" who, either before the elections, or with a certain frequency begin to "yell at all corners" that at the present time it is not necessary to develop a new line of armored vehicles, which consists of MBT and BMP of various modifications, simply work out our order "sworn friends" from the West. And, of course, in the first ranks of the "all-footed people" it acts as a financial and economic bloc of the government together with its chairman, who nevertheless tries with caution, although sometimes he is also "driven around the bends." This is followed by the "opposition liberals" and other "huskies" of a lower rank ... All this company has long been crying Art. 275 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation and, as a logical continuation for all of them, for years so "-dozen" health-promoting work in the fresh air somewhere beyond the Arctic Circle, among taiga and mosquitoes, with deep comprehension of everything that has been done and reflections on the future ...
    The fact is that these "clever men" are simply unable to understand that the most important thing in a war is the need to protect the life of an ordinary soldier, because strategically and tactically, wars are waged by generals, and a simple soldier brings victory ... In addition, MBT T-14 " Armata ", BMPT" Terminator-3 "together with BMP T-15, BMP" Kurganets "and" Boomerang "with the technical support of the new BREM T-16, can create a new and highly effective configuration of the RF Armed Forces, which will be a new word in the development of armored vehicles in the whole world and will have no equal for a very long time ...
  23. MaksoMelan
    MaksoMelan 29 July 2016 18: 06
    0
    ...... the American "Combat Systems of the Future" was supposed to be a "system of systems", which would use a unified tracked chassis for eight different types of armored vehicles, a combat platform and self-propelled artillery. At the same time, he believes that over 10 years in the United States spent about $ 20 billion, but could not realize any of the ideas.

    According to Davis, the Russian Federation took about 6 years to design, test and launch production of technologically advanced combat vehicles, such as the T-14 Armata and BMP T-15, which are equipped according to the latest trends in technology.

    He believes that the T-14 is impenetrable and powerful, like the Abrams from the USA. He noted that in 1991 a tank from America would defeat any enemy, but now these tanks have lost such power.

    http://rueconomics.ru/156082-smi-rossiyskie-platformyi-armata-pokazyivayut-chto-
    armiya-ssha-teryaet-prezhnee-mogushhestvo
    1. Lord blacwood
      Lord blacwood 29 July 2016 19: 23
      +1
      At the same time, he believes that over 10 years in the United States spent about $ 20 billion, but could not realize any of the ideas.

      And besides, for further development it was necessary to spend 300 billion dollars.
  24. mitrich
    mitrich 29 July 2016 19: 10
    -4
    Quotation: blooded man
    Quote: EvgNik
    Quotation: blooded man
    if you vote AGAINST EP and all then name the parties for which you need to vote FOR

    1. I wrote - think, or do you have a head to eat?
    2. Did not look at your profile immediately, anonym, but it’s not accepted to communicate with anonymous on VO. Guilty, I’ll correct it.

    Merged, as expected. The gray matter is unable to process your information.

    I can write anything on my profile, only how can this help you answer the questions I asked? You have long understood that you wrote nonsense and you just can’t admit that's all.

    I will become like YOU. Prostitute you cheap, ready to lie under any, including, and under the obese party of crooks and thieves. You nevermind that the cannibals are commies, that the thief of EP, that other scum, the main thing is power.
    From people like you, goblins, all the evil is happening here.
  25. akm8226
    akm8226 29 July 2016 19: 10
    +1
    Currently, the main value is the soldier! Therefore, everything that protects him must be of the highest class! Including BMP.
  26. japs
    japs 29 July 2016 19: 12
    +4
    As the elections approached, individuals with "correct" advice for the people and a "way of thinking" were everywhere. Recently on VO - "patriot" S. Karaganov - even baptize!

    "One believer" - For whom to vote is a personal matter of every citizen. I would vote for Zyuganov or his party, she is the only one that has the right goal. IMHO.

    But I, although Russian, am "Belarusian".
  27. Victor Wolz
    Victor Wolz 29 July 2016 20: 56
    0
    The BMP-3 is a wonderful machine and ideal for T-80s (the English Channel) and it will still serve, but apparently in Soviet theory it was based on the opinion that cities and fortified areas should not be taken or bypassed or bombed with nuclear warheads. But the T-15 is needed, including for the capture of fortified areas and the capture of cities. They are expensive, but they do not need thousands of 300 enough for a start and the same amount in reserve for assault units. The Kurgan was apparently created to replace the BMP-1 and BMP-2, but its 30mm cannon armament has no advantages over the same BMP-2. You must immediately put 57mm. A boomerang is not bad in booking, but why then the typhoons?
  28. pirr
    pirr 29 July 2016 21: 42
    +1
    that's about the site "pikabu", it was a shame. there often popular science articles are higher than popular mechanics
  29. Krabik
    Krabik 29 July 2016 23: 50
    0
    The Gaidar Witnesses Sect, generously sponsored by the Soros Foundation, has grown an entire army of economists in our country whose main task is to reduce and sell everything abroad, or better to live at the difference in rates and do nothing.

    Therefore, our economic bloc is absolutely right that BMP is too expensive and it still needs to be done, in short, a lot of hemorrhoids, and even new jobs and generally not lordly it is a business to develop industry.

    In addition, women still give birth, it is easier to make thinner and cheaper.

    However, this approach does not contribute to the development of the country, not in the economic or political sense, in the international arena!

    If you count, as Glazyev, then any large order increases jobs and raises wages for employees, and taxes and pensions increase.

    New weapons will be more readily bought abroad, and this is also an influx of greenery for the purchase of technologies and yachts for our beloved "elites".

    For this reason, farts from our overseas friends are torn. our new weapons will be sold better than their old%)
  30. Philip Staros
    Philip Staros 30 July 2016 01: 23
    +3
    A few thoughts ...
    1. Well, arguing about the silhouette of equipment, I propose to take into account the silhouette of that part, hit in which will destroy the CREW. Ms. Armata (tank) ... The tower is just iron. Most of the other parts of the tank are critical for him as cars, but the crew does not kill. Out, I think, a smaller area of ​​the lateral projection of the danger zone ... and if you look from above, it’s even more interesting ...

    2. BMPs should be adequate to the "other side", and to me personally, from what I read and saw about our armored vehicles of the current (last) generation - I would like something more weighty when meeting a Puma and similar vehicles weighing 30-40 tons.
    And, let me remind you - now all the new Western (European) armored vehicles are designed to defeat our infantry fighting vehicles in the forehead and protect (at least the forehead) from our 30mm. guns.
    So Kurganets with "Baikal" would be just right ...

    3. About the price - technology alone costs money. But they are valuable not only in the framework of a separate project and a series of machines.
    And in a series of cars will cost comparable, I think - technology does not stand still. In some cases, the production of more advanced products is CHEAPER.
    In general, the car will not be cheap, because these days there are too many ELECTRONICS and other smart things in these cars. But put them on any car of our time - be it BMP-3 or Kurganets.

    4. The latest technology does not have to make machine control inaccessible to the art of geniuses. Look at the computer you are sitting at! This has long been a HOUSEHOLD APPLIANCE. But 40 years ago, only engineers and programmers found a common language with computers.
    What is difficult to poke at the screen of fingers sitting in Armada? For the current generation, these skills are somehow even simpler than fussing with pieces of iron and with what devices from the time of our grandfathers ...
    I'm exaggerating. GOOD weapon skills require training anyway. Well, yes, professionals, experienced warriors, and earlier did not work out in a week.
    The development of the interface will make the technique easier, albeit more expensive.
  31. Anatoly
    Anatoly 30 July 2016 18: 40
    0
    There was too much hype around Armata, I don’t see any revolutionary ideas on this platform, if I take a tank without a tower as the basis for the platform, there are no differences between the T-14 and Leopard or Abroms or the same T-90, and install a module with a gun can be on any case.
    1. Cat man null
      Cat man null 30 July 2016 18: 45
      0
      Quote: Anatoly
      ... on this platform I do not see any revolutionary ideas ...

      - these are your personal problems

      Quote: Anatoly
      if you take a tank without a tower as the basis of the platform, there are no differences between the T-14 and Leopard or Abroms or the same T-90, and you can install the module with a gun on any building

      - um ... well, for example, turning Leopard (or even T-90) backwards, you can easily make TBMP from it (see T-15), right? wink
      - this is far from all the differences, it is just as one of the most accessible examples to understand.

      AbrOms through "a" write, incidentally yes
      1. Anatoly
        Anatoly 30 July 2016 19: 48
        +1
        TBMPs are made from any tank, and the revolutionary idea is when there are fundamental differences in design.
        1. Cat man null
          Cat man null 30 July 2016 21: 18
          +1
          Quote: Anatoly
          TBMP is made from any tank ...

          - yeah ... make me TBMP from T-90, I beg laughing
          - just do not forget that the engine at the T-90 is located at the back ... where will the landing party go, eh? I can’t get past the engine, I warn you. Everything is very ... tightly packed there request

          Quote: Anatoly
          and the revolutionary idea is when there are fundamental differences in the design

          - uzbagoytes ... everything is all right there with "ideas"

          Anatoly, do not get into the bottle ... I’m still kind of a no, but the tankman ... was yes
          1. Anatoly
            Anatoly 31 July 2016 13: 27
            0
            Open the page about heavy infantry fighting vehicles and look, even Ukrainians from T-64 did not mention the Jews, but in Russia from flamethrowers, what’s not a landing tank?
            1. Cat man null
              Cat man null 31 July 2016 16: 37
              0
              Quote: Anatoly
              Open the heavy BMP page

              - share a link to the "page about heavy infantry fighting vehicles", pliz ...
              - the site accepted an appeal to you

              Quote: Anatoly
              even Ukrainians from T-64 did

              - I heard a lot of screams that are going
              - to do it - I haven’t seen it anywhere. Have you seen?
              - I served on the T-64 and I have a good idea of ​​what is there, how much and where it is poked. How to make a BMP out of it - honestly, I don’t know ... IMHO nothing request

              Quote: Anatoly
              not to mention the Jews

              - Name? So he is based on the Merkava, and she is "anterior motor" ...
              - Ahzarit?

              The Akhzarit armored personnel carrier was created on the basis of the chassis and hull of the T-54/55 tank with the turret removed.
              The power plant and transmission are replaced by: the Soviet diesel engine previously installed on the T-54/55 was replaced by the more compact and powerful General Motors 8-cylinder diesel engine, which freed up space between the starboard side of the tank and the engine for the corridor to the aft door, also installed a new hydromechanical transmission "Allison"

              - such a nice modification, agree ... belay

              Quote: Anatoly
              and in Russia, flamethrowers, which is not an amphibious tank?

              - Buratina? Solntsepek? Absolutely not. I don’t remember other "tanks at flamethrowers" what

              Ahzarit. On the right in the photo is the same door for landing entry / exit. Not the most, by the way, comfortable, IMHO.
              1. Anatoly
                Anatoly 31 July 2016 18: 30
                0
                They did and do dispute about anything, the Ukrainians have a model, but it doesn’t matter, you can turn anything upside down and change the layout, only the design of the armored hull with the chassis does not change, so I say that there are no real constructive ideas
                1. Forest
                  Forest 31 July 2016 19: 30
                  0
                  There the engine is a two-stroke engine, it is compact in itself and you can even twist it when installing it with cancer.
                  1. Cat man null
                    Cat man null 31 July 2016 19: 41
                    0
                    Quote: Forest
                    There the engine is two-stroke, it is compact in itself and you can even twist it when installing it with cancer

                    - Have you ever seen MTO 64s? Climbed inside? Did you try to twist-change that thread?
                    - everything is compressed there, like .. I don’t know what, but very tightly, figs crawl without a sub-sub-cover
                    - so what about twist-twirl - I would personally beware.

                    Read what the Israelites with Ahzarit did:

                    - threw out the regular engine and transmission
                    - put a more compact (!) engine and a new transmission
                    - as a result, they got something like a passage from the BO (transformed into a troop compartment) to the stern. Width no more than a rustic outhouse
                    - a miracle technique, why fellow
                    1. Forest
                      Forest 1 August 2016 09: 41
                      0
                      The transmission on the BMP-64 was replaced by EMNIP, and the engine itself is compact, especially considering that the hull’s height has been increased by almost half a meter. This is not MTU Leopard for you.
                      1. Cat man null
                        Cat man null 1 August 2016 12: 54
                        0
                        Quote: Forest
                        The transmission on the BMP-64 was replaced

                        - BMP-64 is only in prototypes request

                        Quote: Forest
                        and the engine itself is compact

                        - You did not tactfully answer the question:

                        Quote: Cat Man Null
                        Have you ever seen MTN 64-ki? Climbed inside? Did you try to twist-change that thread?

                        - therefore, you, the campaign, theorist. The engine is compact, only there (in the T-64) there is so much pon around it ... it is convinced that moving it - you get tired of swallowing dust.

                        About the cars that are actually in service - here, I repeat:

                        Quote: Vika
                        The Akhzarit armored personnel carrier was created on the basis of the chassis and hull of the T-54/55 tank with the turret removed.
                        The power plant and transmission are replaced: the Soviet diesel engine previously installed on the T-54/55 was replaced by a more compact and powerful General Motors 8-cylinder diesel engine, which freed up space between the starboard side of the tank and the engine for the corridor to the aft door, and a new one was installed hydromechanical transmission "Allison"


                        Something like this ...
                      2. Forest
                        Forest 1 August 2016 13: 41
                        0
                        The HCMB cannot be understood - as they call their car, and the heavy armored personnel carrier, and the support car, and the BMPV, and somehow.
                        Quote: Cat Man Null
                        Have you ever seen MTN 64-ki? Climbed inside? Did you try to twist-change that thread?
                        - therefore, you, the campaign, theorist. The engine is compact, only there (in the T-64) there is so much pon around it ... it is convinced that moving it - you get tired of swallowing dust.

                        With 64, yes, theorist) But, after all, the MTO is more compact than the 72-one, plus an increase in the dimensions of the body in the nose and made it possible to cram the unbearable. And with cooling there they cheated - from what I know - the engine was too hot on the samples.
                2. Cat man null
                  Cat man null 31 July 2016 19: 35
                  0
                  Quote: Anatoly
                  the design of the armored hull with the chassis does not change, so I say that there are no real design ideas

                  - well. Let's go "from the opposite". What would you personally recognize as a good, constructive idea?
                  - tanks flying and going underground - do not offer fellow
    2. aba
      aba 30 July 2016 20: 11
      +1
      if you take a tank without a tower as the basis of the platform, there are no differences between the T-14 and the Leopard

      Yeah, easily on any tank uninhabited tower! But here the stupid Germans proposed the further development of their Leopard, only the tower inhabited was left, why should it ?!
      1. Anatoly
        Anatoly 31 July 2016 15: 31
        -1
        That is exactly why? Yes, because in battle it is necessary to ensure not only the survivability of the tank, but also to maintain combat efficiency, and in Armata the module is poorly protected even from armor-piercing shells of automatic guns.
    3. Forest
      Forest 30 July 2016 20: 31
      +1
      The T-14 hull has a huge difference from the hull of a modern tank - usually in front of the control compartment and tanks, in the middle is a fighting compartment with weapons and ammunition, in the stern of the MTO. The T-14 has a general control compartment ahead, in the middle a fighting compartment without anything, tanks in the MTO. So the gun module can neither be installed on Abrams nor Leo - there will be nowhere to put tanks and crew.
      1. Anatoly
        Anatoly 31 July 2016 13: 37
        -1
        We are not talking about the layout of the tank, where something is shoved, but about the general design, and here there are no innovations.
        1. Forest
          Forest 31 July 2016 19: 27
          0
          The overall design is called the layout.
  32. dvaposto
    dvaposto 30 July 2016 22: 21
    -3
    Channel 1 viewers don’t understand why they are being held for suckers? the armata from the cannon hit the plywood shield from 200 m and it is necessary .... even pierced it.
    Artama can see and accompany the target, which goes straight at her. Hurray! here are miracles!
    in addition to a real change in the crew’s landing, you’re a solid populist pussy. so everything is secret, what are we afraid to show real tests? it’s secret how they did it, but is the reliability of protection against ATGMs, shells lying a secret? you can show on electronic turntables, but not on the tank? most likely everything is very damp and not reliable, that's scary to show, even successful trials. suck in any garbage to the audience of 1 TV channel - people hawala. suddenly a Russian will see how, once, the SU-27 or MIG-29, when they had been flying over the GDR for ten years already.
    It’s no secret to test the new ICBM, but how a tank really hits and defends is a terrible secret.
    1. Forest
      Forest 31 July 2016 10: 43
      +2
      I’ll tell you a very terrible secret - the Germans classified the booking and test results of Leo2 in the 70's, the data on the T-72B and K-5 are classified - do you want to put data on the latest armored vehicles on a silver platter? And the results of firing at the shield, by the way, are excellent - if you take the distance beyond 100 m, then the deviation in 30-40 mm gives an accuracy of the order of 1,2-1,6 MOA, which is not bad for a rifled barrel.
      1. Cat man null
        Cat man null 31 July 2016 22: 55
        0
        Quote: Forest
        ... which is good for threaded barrel.

        - ummm ... which side is the "rifled barrel" to Armata? Or have I missed something in this life?
        1. Forest
          Forest 1 August 2016 10: 00
          0
          Show where I wrote that on Armata a rifled gun? At least read before writing.
          1. Cat man null
            Cat man null 1 August 2016 12: 21
            0
            Um ... I understood it this way:

            Quote: dvaposto
            the armata from the cannon hit the plywood shield from 200 m and it’s necessary .... even pierced it

            - Your Answer:

            Quote: Forest
            And the results of firing at the shield, by the way, are excellent - if you take the distance over 100 m, then a deviation of 30-40 mm gives an accuracy of about 1,2-1,6 MOA, which is not bad for a rifled barrel

            Or are you not talking about Armata? So on 72-ke is also smooth-bore ...

            I don’t understand anything belay

            Quote: Forest
            At least read before writing.

            - and here it is - you said too much yes
            1. Forest
              Forest 1 August 2016 13: 34
              0
              In general, it was compared with small arms, no matter how strange it sounds, but for most it is the most understandable. Comparing with tank guns, then for 2A82-1M the dispersion of 0,003-0,004 is supposed (and this with all kinds of corrections for jambs), for a very, very accurate Rapier it is 0,0023-0,0025, for 2A46M-1 - 0,0037-nNX0,0045NN-RNNX 120 L55 - 0,003-0,0035. Is it here that our fellow Ukrainians stood out - according to their statements the dispersal of the KBA-3 0,001.
  33. voyaka uh
    voyaka uh 30 July 2016 23: 05
    -1
    In the face of severe cuts in the military budget in the coming years
    TBTR in the troops of Russia is unlikely to go. If they collect 3-4 dozens of Armat -
    it will be already good.
    1. Vadim237
      Vadim237 30 July 2016 23: 52
      0
      "In the face of severe cuts in the military budget in the coming years" - No one has cut anything.
    2. TSOOBER
      TSOOBER 31 July 2016 21: 45
      0
      According to data provided by Russia to the UN, Russian military spending in 2015 increased by 48 percent compared to the previous year. In 2015, the total amount of defense spending increased from 1,9 trillion to 2,9 trillion rubles. These figures were published in the database of the UN Office for Disarmament Affairs (UNODA).
      Most of all, Russia spent on naval forces - more than 700 billion rubles. This is 38 percent more than in 2014. However, the most significant increase was shown by expenditures on the air force: costs increased by 66 percent to 662,4 billion rubles. The cost of ground forces increased by 19 percent and amounted to 582,5 billion rubles.

      About 1 trillion rubles are listed in the category "Other types of armed forces". According to the UN standard, states can include in this column the costs of paramilitaries capable of conducting military operations, writes RBC. For example, the border service of the FSB or internal troops. A third of all declared military spending falls on unnamed structures.

      The data received by the UN does not match the expenditures indicated in the Russian budget under the heading "National Defense". The amount declared in it reaches 3,18 trillion rubles. A year earlier, the budget indicated an amount of 500 billion more than in the information submitted to UNODA.
  34. Forever so
    Forever so 31 July 2016 11: 05
    0
    Ideal consumers who are raised by the Medvedev government, the concept of MOTHERLAND is alien, the consumer should consume, and not fight for their identity. And in general, planes, tanks, infantry fighting vehicles can be bought in America, because American is the best, is it true, Dmitry Anatolyevich ??
    1. Cat man null
      Cat man null 31 July 2016 23: 03
      0
      Quote: Forever so
      Ideal consumers who are raised by the Medvedev government, the concept of MOTHERLAND is alien, the consumer should consume, and not fight for their identity. And in general, planes, tanks, infantry fighting vehicles can be bought in America, because American is the best, is it true, Dmitry Anatolyevich ??

      - I would like to note that the phrase "ideal consumer" has a double meaning:
      - the first is the very thing that is so "loved" on the Internet: a creature that does not produce anything and at the same time "enjoys life"
      - the second is a competent user of that (by that) that provides the current level of development of equipment, technologies and other, and other. That is, one who, without inventing a bicycle, undertakes to adapt this bicycle ... to flight into space, conditionally.

      The second type (and interpretation) to me personally is much prettier yes
  35. Winnie76
    Winnie76 31 July 2016 14: 53
    0
    Quote: voyaka uh
    In the face of severe cuts in the military budget in the coming years
    TBTR in the troops of Russia is unlikely to go. If they collect 3-4 dozens of Armat -
    it will be already good.

    In conditions when they begin to spread rot on the international scene, they will not spare money for the army. Rather, they will refuse to support pseudo-allies like Belarus
  36. Doppelgänger
    Doppelgänger 31 July 2016 15: 27
    +2
    One can say only one thing, there is never a lot of money for arming, it's stupid, I would even say it is irresponsible to save on the army. Remember the famous expression "A people who do not want to feed their army will soon be forced to feed someone else's" armament costs.
  37. complete zero
    complete zero 31 July 2016 20: 52
    +3
    - "There will be no war in the style of World War II" .... Nothing of the kind, the mobilization resource of the state has not been canceled by ANYONE AND NEVER ... about the "held Armata" ... (God forbid, if so) although it is far from a fact ... as well as a fifth generation fighter (at least minus)
  38. kirpich
    kirpich 31 July 2016 21: 29
    +1
    The usual ideological war. We can not oppose, so at least justification .. m.
    Let them push yes
  39. Dulat
    Dulat 31 July 2016 22: 47
    0
    I agree that it is not a pity to protect the homeland. For example, a tank costs (cost) 1000 r. then it’s not a pity to buy it for 1200, let 200 go in favor of the plant for development, but if it is shoved
    at a price of 3525 p 52 kopecks, the seller must be shot as a traitor to the Motherland and put in his place an enthusiastic patriot who will make this tank excellent for 1200
  40. Jack-b
    Jack-b 1 August 2016 03: 24
    0
    Well written, but was it worth throwing the beads?
  41. Navigator Basov
    Navigator Basov 1 August 2016 19: 17
    +2
    I watch Channel One and Star; and I read Pikabu, and Military Review. This is bad?
  42. Navigator Basov
    Navigator Basov 1 August 2016 20: 58
    0
    Accordingly, such a machine will cost accordingly.
  43. Alexey-74
    Alexey-74 4 August 2016 12: 29
    0
    New equipment is needed. The author looks from a purely economic point of view, it is clear that they did not have to fight ... I know how tanks and especially BMPs with armored personnel carriers burn and how fighters complain about insufficient protection, "blindness", small firepower ... so it was with the militants they fought , but if there is a regular high-tech army (NATO, the USA or China) ... and the question has always been about the modernization of existing equipment, including the USSR, but the limit of modernization comes and then a fundamentally new generation is born
  44. derik1970
    derik1970 27 September 2016 08: 41
    0
    Thanks for the article, I completely agree with you. Well, all the "guardians" deputies, they are essentially traitors, they have one goal to stake out a place in the public service, and grab the loot, they stupidly spit on the country. For the sake of achieving their goals, these deputies, elected officials ... are ready to do anything, they have already sold the country (the Chinese are developing our lands, which is not a mess). And different cars are needed both in the army and in civilian life, and there is money for this all in the country, they are with the oligarchs. But we will never see this money, but you can see the ultra-modern yachts of oligarchs on the Internet. Everyone wanted to become rich, and at one time they gave the country to thieves and crooks, now we are reaping the benefits. It is striking that the army also participated in this mess in surrendering the country, violating the oath and the State Clinical Hospital and the Ministry of Internal Affairs and all the others, but how could it be without them ... so the thieves' company continues to celebrate and we will hear not such pearls about the uselessness of military equipment. By the way, the betrayal of the country happened in the same way as under Tsar Nicholas II, some generals were stupidly silent, others completely contributed ... I think that no matter what we wrote here, this will not change anything in the existing order of things, kitchen conversations and nothing more , the deputies do not read this site, but who should they take on the pencil of dissidents. It is even indicative that try to doubt the imperfection of the Armata tank and you will be stupidly banned ...