BMPT Analysis of the "flight"

[Major Shaitan Singh]

BMPT in Russian Army

"BMPT suffering ..." - so I was entitled serious enough material from the "Army of the collection" - organ is not anyone anyhow, but directly to the Russian Defense Ministry. Two doctors of Military Sciences and whole colonel decided to reflect on the concept of building BMPT. However, the authors probably forgotten that now the question of the direct support of the tanks on the agenda is not intended, and created before the car though and keep the old acronym in the title, the developers classified as a "machine fire support." What? It stands not seem to need to believe that anything and everything!
Just want to note that the experts primarily criticized the armed recognizing "unconvincing" artillery component. Totally agree with them . I do not know how much more our army will be worn with Shipunovsky 30-kami as a "written sack!" What is the reason for the absence in Russia of the normal machine large size (40-60mm)? Departmental disinterest and contradictions (GABTU Grau), floats between the MoD and industry, or it's just not the desire of industry to move and engage in truly innovative designs? I do not know. But I know for sure that the project 45mm gun with telescopic AP shells, which previously once wrote , safely failure - the brain is not enough even for something that would steal and modify a similar design from the French!


BM with 57mm AP CDB "Petrel" need to install it on BMPT

Speaking of the BMPT, designers, creating this particular car, as I understand it, on the principle "put it there." But, excuse me, for some reason, specifically developed for BMPT sights and missile system, but do rework 57mm cannon nobody puzzled - shrugged off her blankly with the motivation "can not fit" - in the sense of not linked, as some would have liked this . Well, a traditional - "too big shots - BC gets a little" - the type of space for its placement is not, although under two extra crew member volumes were found - well, this is so, digression, by the way ...

Very true authors note a danger to aircraft tanks means of attack. I do not know, did anyone attention to it, but the main anti-tank weapons in the United States and NATO is not a tank ("tanks with tanks do not fight" Stalin), and a helicopter. This is enshrined in virtually all tactical instructions to NATO. Moreover, the strategic objective of destroying a huge number of tanks of the Soviet army was solved by building a helicopter components of NATO armies. On this helicopter they had many helicopters were good, and they sharpened primarily to fight with our tanks. Actually, this concept proved itself during checkout fight - mean "Desert Storm." There is most effective in the fight against Iraqi tanks showed aviation and in particular helicopters "Apache". The defeat of the Iraqi air defenses (both strategic and tactical) in the first hours of fighting is now called the primary cause of military defeat in Iraq. Actually the same thing I was confirmed in conversations themselves the US military, which included helicopter pilots "Cobra" and "Apache".

The authors say that a possible solution to the problem in this situation may be to integrate BMPT in army air defense and "increase in the number of targeted channels, operating on the principle of" saw - shoot. " Authors probably do not know that the results of the GOP BMPT ob.199 were right suggestions for further modernization of the machine with its integration into ASUtb, as well as in the army air defense system. Proposals were made to equip the BMPT air defense systems "Sagittarius". However, by the end of the GOP seems to managers themselves KB forgotten the BMPT firepower, which were laid in this car originally. To begin with, that the replacement of ATRA "Cornet" on the Republic of Kazakhstan "Attack-T" was due to the availability supersonic missile is to combat the helicopters. It is for this same reason, the machine is not intended to place PU 4 and 8 or even 12 missiles. In this case, the JMA BMPT, thanks "not advertised" property sight - accompany multiple targets without changing the position of the mirror, could provide all rocket salvo firing ammunition. To do this, the rocket was enough to throw the window of the control panel, which is a square 40x40 meters.However, from the sale of abandoned, probably for what would later be able to make a "modernization" than now UKBTM and deals.


BMPT model sample was equipped with missiles "Cornet"


... In the future, "Cornet" was replaced supersonic "Attack"

Another maxim respected authors is the need to improve the efficiency of complex weapons against BMPT tank hazardous manpower (TOZHS). As the authors write: "To defeat such purposes, it is necessary that the supplied weapons BMPT included gun, having the opportunity to fire not only straight, half, and indirect fire, that is, combining quality gun and mortar" - so they trying to turn BMPT in "Assault Tank" . But that their caliber main gun in 82mm is absolutely insufficient. His choice of authors prove the existence of a large stock of 82mm min known "since the Great Patriotic War" sufficient ease of creating a "semi-automatic guns" and autoloader. We must assume that in this case they are referring to is also significant Ammunition. This 82mm cannon they plan zakompleksirovat with 30mm AP, AG (in the original article authors - colonel and doctor - somehow operate abbreviation AGS - ie infantry automatic grenade launcher on the machine!) And a machine gun. But let me, if the caliber of 82 mm and justified so effective? The authors clearly forget that its widespread 82mm mortars received its light weight, allowing them to maneuver quickly on the battlefield in the infantry formations, and not due to the fact that their damaging effect was much less spectacular! The authors did not take into account the economic factor - the need to develop such weapons. At the same time, we already have such and also more efficient system - the famous "triad" "Bakhcha" with a 100mm gun and "Triad" with a 120 mm gun type "Nona" or "Vienna", developed in the early 1990s in GSKB-2 on the "frame". At the same time fears for little ammunition guns such high caliber shot:

A) have finished loading mechanism 100m guns, designed for 100 shots fit into the dimensions of the BMP-3 in the embodiment of fire support vehicle
B) the presence of significantly more damaging effect of 100 rounds of ammunition, and in particular 120 mm. At the same time, the latest development of new shots from OFS 3OF74 "transmitter-2" and the CAS "Rocker".


Fighting compartment of the BMP-3 with 100mm gun and KAZ "Arena"

Refinement loading mechanism BMP-3 with an increase to 100 BC 100mm rounds

 

[Major Shaitan Singh]

BMPT ob.781 with 100mm instrument development GSKB-2


TBTR-BMPT development KBTM just 100mm from the instrument


Layout BMPT ob.782 with 120mm instrument development GSKB-2



However, the authors go further. They not only do BMPT should combine the functions ZRPK and assault tanks, in their opinion, should become more BMPT and "tactical reconnaissance and fire complex". This idea is of course very tempting, but almost impossible, if only because it is a good universal machine - the machine "of all trades", in contrast to the highly specialized machines to create a nearly impossible. Furthermore, the existing design BMPT, just characterized by the desire to combine in one machine everything. As a result, no one knows what to do with this machine and how to use it. Again, at the beginning of his article, the authors discuss evaluation criterion "cost-effectiveness". Already existing BMPT cost exceeds the cost of the tank. And what if life will be embodied in all Wishlist authors?Compensates the efficiency of the machine whether it cost? In hardly! The practice of military conflicts shows that it is often much better to have a larger number of cheaper cars than less expensive. So I think that, in general, of course, the authors put forward the right idea. If shrug off their private concrete proposals, the idea goes in the right direction. That's just not necessary to do superuniversal "soldier." Rather, one should focus on the cheap and best specialized machines. Consider it expedient to study the issue of inclusion in ground weapons and tactical application of the following machines:

1.fire support vehicle, equipped with weapons complex AP caliber 40-60mm (type A)
2.fire support vehicle, equipped with a set of arms with the installation tool of 100-120mm and 30-20-14,5mm automatic cannon (pulemmetom) (Type B)
3.Assault Tank with a howitzer caliber weapons 122-155mm
4.Machinery reconnaissance and targeting
on a single platform with a heavy armored tank level series and above.


BMPT in Russian Army


Russian "Terminator"

Well, for a snack ... appealing "to the prestige of the state" in developing and adopting a specific weapon model - there debilizm, profanity and at least unprofessional. Mentions as examples of "tank Porohovschikova" people who have a degree and big stars on their epaulettes, is not perplexed, not attack banal laughter. If their specific proposals can still be somehow debate, the authors wish to once again make Russia "home of elephants" makes them work at least not serious in view of the fact that these dear people are still in captivity legends and illusions created yet Soviet propaganda. I would like to advise authors like - if you "geeks" do not meddle in the destiny of historians! Or seriously take up the study of history itself.

 

[SipahSalar]

Its essentially the weapon systems of BMP-3 put in the chasis of a tank.

 

[C130]

I like the concept.
how thick is the armor on top??

 

[Bornubus]

BMPT ob.781 with 100mm instrument development GSKB-2


TBTR-BMPT development KBTM just 100mm from the instrument


Layout BMPT ob.782 with 120mm instrument development GSKB-2



However, the authors go further. They not only do BMPT should combine the functions ZRPK and assault tanks, in their opinion, should become more BMPT and "tactical reconnaissance and fire complex". This idea is of course very tempting, but almost impossible, if only because it is a good universal machine - the machine "of all trades", in contrast to the highly specialized machines to create a nearly impossible. Furthermore, the existing design BMPT, just characterized by the desire to combine in one machine everything. As a result, no one knows what to do with this machine and how to use it. Again, at the beginning of his article, the authors discuss evaluation criterion "cost-effectiveness". Already existing BMPT cost exceeds the cost of the tank. And what if life will be embodied in all Wishlist authors?Compensates the efficiency of the machine whether it cost? In hardly! The practice of military conflicts shows that it is often much better to have a larger number of cheaper cars than less expensive. So I think that, in general, of course, the authors put forward the right idea. If shrug off their private concrete proposals, the idea goes in the right direction. That's just not necessary to do superuniversal "soldier." Rather, one should focus on the cheap and best specialized machines. Consider it expedient to study the issue of inclusion in ground weapons and tactical application of the following machines:

1.fire support vehicle, equipped with weapons complex AP caliber 40-60mm (type A)
2.fire support vehicle, equipped with a set of arms with the installation tool of 100-120mm and 30-20-14,5mm automatic cannon (pulemmetom) (Type B)
3.Assault Tank with a howitzer caliber weapons 122-155mm
4.Machinery reconnaissance and targeting
on a single platform with a heavy armored tank level series and above.


BMPT in Russian Army


Russian "Terminator"

Well, for a snack ... appealing "to the prestige of the state" in developing and adopting a specific weapon model - there debilizm, profanity and at least unprofessional. Mentions as examples of "tank Porohovschikova" people who have a degree and big stars on their epaulettes, is not perplexed, not attack banal laughter. If their specific proposals can still be somehow debate, the authors wish to once again make Russia "home of elephants" makes them work at least not serious in view of the fact that these dear people are still in captivity legends and illusions created yet Soviet propaganda. I would like to advise authors like - if you "geeks" do not meddle in the destiny of historians! Or seriously take up the study of history itself.

Can Indian older T 55 ....can be converted to heavy IFV..?

 

[Penguin]

Can Indian older T 55 ....can be converted to heavy IFV..?

Tarmour, Indian Heavy APC (a T-55 conversion)

 

[Bornubus]

@Penguin

Thanks for the detailed post....but i think indian ones are not weaponized.