Russia Defence Forum

Would you like to react to this message? Create an account in a few clicks or log in to continue.

Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


+87
pavi
caveat emptor
Rasisuki Nebia
Lennox
lancelot
Russian_Patriot_
mnztr
Scorpius
lyle6
LMFS
Arrow
PhSt
Azi
RTN
Isos
ahmedfire
Austin
william.boutros
dino00
medo
Hole
Sprut-B
GarryB
KomissarBojanchev
The-thing-next-door
0nillie0
Peŕrier
eehnie
kopyo-21
T-47
miketheterrible
kvs
marcellogo
MMBR
x_54_u43
Big_Gazza
BliTTzZ
TheArmenian
SeigSoloyvov
wilhelm
calripson
Benya
Orocairion
Luq man
hoom
azw
GunshipDemocracy
Zastel
Mindstorm
KiloGolf
Cyrus the great
victor1985
Ranxerox71
Neutrality
Project Canada
zg18
Glyph
ult
sepheronx
Rmf
Arctic_Fox
Book.
AlfaT8
mutantsushi
xeno
Cyberspec
KoTeMoRe
Mike E
cracker
alexZam
Werewolf
Zivo
Regular
magnumcromagnon
BKP
franco
jhelb
Vann7
AJ-47
2SPOOKY4U
Flanky
Morpheus Eberhardt
George1
VladimirSahin
collegeboy16
PapaDragon
flamming_python
91 posters

    Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #2

    KoTeMoRe
    KoTeMoRe


    Posts : 4212
    Points : 4227
    Join date : 2015-04-21
    Location : Krankhaus Central.

    Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #2 Empty Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #2

    Post  KoTeMoRe Thu May 14, 2015 7:32 pm

    flamming_python wrote:Yep I agree, the APC's carrying capacity is amoebic, if the report of a 8-man capacity is true then nothing justifies it. The turret doesn't (or shouldn't) go into the hull; all that space should be free, and the actual vehicle is high, long and wide.
    Should carry 10-11 at the very LEAST. That's to say a full squad and preferably extra space for 1-2 as well and/or ammo/supplies.

    Jesus the BMP-3 has a 7-men fire team. This is based on the BMP-3 with a new arraignement, engine in front, thicker armour, retains the sponsons that make the rear area really tight. Why in the world are you surprized. Once again, this has less to do with IFV or APC variant, it has to do with the limitations coming from the transformation of an existing model.

    Relax, check the pictures...
    GarryB
    GarryB


    Posts : 38695
    Points : 39191
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #2 Empty Re: Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #2

    Post  GarryB Fri May 15, 2015 11:08 am

    Russia is not really taking seriously USA . Is relying too much in their nuclear weapons

    Of course Russia is taking the USA seriously, but what do you expect them to do?

    Spend 80% of their GDP on weapons to catch up?

    Do you think that would even help or just make things worse?

    Russia can't afford to spend at the rate the US spends and can't actually afford to have equivalent forces, yet in many areas it actually manages to design and build comparable and even better system and produce them for itself and for export.

    Russia doesn't need to be able to defeat the US... Vietnam even on its best day have never had the forces and capabilities to invade and defeat the US... but they didn't need it. What they needed was the cold hard will to continue fighting long after the US had given up the fight and continue to take hits and take pain while continuing to give hits and give pain the US was no longer prepared to take.

    Russia is in a much better position than any other country on the planet to "defend" itself from the US... at the moment that is largely because of its nuclear forces, but its conventional potential is enormous and is rapidly growing. you want them to have it now and I can understand that, but it didn't happen over night for the west it took decades and trillions of dollars and it wont come over night for Russia either... no matter how much they spend.


    BTW can I ask where the figures for the capacity of the Kurganets APC came from?

    Are they official sources or guesstimates?


    As the firepower of an infantry squad increases with increased communications and more accurate rifles and the ability to call in artillery and air strikes I rather suspect the number of troops in a unit will decrease anyway.
    flamming_python
    flamming_python


    Posts : 8988
    Points : 9050
    Join date : 2012-01-30

    Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #2 Empty Re: Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #2

    Post  flamming_python Fri May 15, 2015 11:15 am

    KoTeMoRe wrote:
    flamming_python wrote:Yep I agree, the APC's carrying capacity is amoebic, if the report of a 8-man capacity is true then nothing justifies it. The turret doesn't (or shouldn't) go into the hull; all that space should be free, and the actual vehicle is high, long and wide.
    Should carry 10-11 at the very LEAST. That's to say a full squad and preferably extra space for 1-2 as well and/or ammo/supplies.

    Jesus the BMP-3 has a 7-men fire team. This is based on the BMP-3 with a new arraignement, engine in front, thicker armour, retains the sponsons that make the rear area really tight. Why in the world are you surprized. Once again, this has less to do with IFV or APC variant, it has to do with the limitations coming from the transformation of an existing model.

    Relax, check the pictures...

    The BMP-3 is an IFV, it's small and cramped and the turret mechanism and operator go down all the way into the hull.
    Nevetheless, it's capacity of 7 men is perfectly adequate for an IFV-class vehicle.

    I'm talking about APCs.
    KoTeMoRe
    KoTeMoRe


    Posts : 4212
    Points : 4227
    Join date : 2015-04-21
    Location : Krankhaus Central.

    Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #2 Empty Re: Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #2

    Post  KoTeMoRe Fri May 15, 2015 11:53 am

    flamming_python wrote:
    KoTeMoRe wrote:
    flamming_python wrote:Yep I agree, the APC's carrying capacity is amoebic, if the report of a 8-man capacity is true then nothing justifies it. The turret doesn't (or shouldn't) go into the hull; all that space should be free, and the actual vehicle is high, long and wide.
    Should carry 10-11 at the very LEAST. That's to say a full squad and preferably extra space for 1-2 as well and/or ammo/supplies.

    Jesus the BMP-3 has a 7-men fire team. This is based on the BMP-3 with a new arraignement, engine in front, thicker armour, retains the sponsons that make the rear area really tight. Why in the world are you surprized. Once again, this has less to do with IFV or APC variant, it has to do with the limitations coming from the transformation of an existing model.

    Relax, check the pictures...

    The BMP-3 is an IFV, it's small and cramped and the turret mechanism and operator go down all the way into the hull.
    Nevetheless, it's capacity of 7 men is perfectly adequate for an IFV-class vehicle.

    I'm talking about APCs.

    Again the BMP has the same limitations because of its engine and sponsons. This vehicle retains the same flaws. Has a front mounted engine that puts the driver quite aback from the original BMP position. Therefore retaining a relatively conservative space for troops. The troop compartiment is barely more spacious, be that on the IVF or the APC variant. And it also retains the sponsons in front which nullify every attempt to gain more space. There's nothing new in here.
    Nevermind the gear for the fireteam has almost doubled and doctrine allows for more firepower.
    KomissarBojanchev
    KomissarBojanchev


    Posts : 1429
    Points : 1584
    Join date : 2012-08-05
    Age : 26
    Location : Varna, Bulgaria

    Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #2 Empty Re: Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #2

    Post  KomissarBojanchev Fri May 15, 2015 6:35 pm

    KoTeMoRe wrote:
    flamming_python wrote:
    KoTeMoRe wrote:
    flamming_python wrote:Yep I agree, the APC's carrying capacity is amoebic, if the report of a 8-man capacity is true then nothing justifies it. The turret doesn't (or shouldn't) go into the hull; all that space should be free, and the actual vehicle is high, long and wide.
    Should carry 10-11 at the very LEAST. That's to say a full squad and preferably extra space for 1-2 as well and/or ammo/supplies.

    Jesus the BMP-3 has a 7-men fire team. This is based on the BMP-3 with a new arraignement, engine in front, thicker armour, retains the sponsons that make the rear area really tight. Why in the world are you surprized. Once again, this has less to do with IFV or APC variant, it has to do with the limitations coming from the transformation of an existing model.

    Relax, check the pictures...

    The BMP-3 is an IFV, it's small and cramped and the turret mechanism and operator go down all the way into the hull.
    Nevetheless, it's capacity of 7 men is perfectly adequate for an IFV-class vehicle.

    I'm talking about APCs.

    Again the BMP has the same limitations because of its engine and sponsons. This vehicle retains the same flaws. Has a front mounted engine that puts the driver quite aback from the original BMP position. Therefore retaining a relatively conservative space for troops. The troop compartiment is barely more spacious, be that on the IVF or the APC variant. And it also retains the sponsons in front which nullify every attempt to gain more space. There's nothing new in here.
    Nevermind the gear for the fireteam has almost doubled and doctrine allows for more firepower.
    BMP-2 and BMP-1 also have a front mounted engine and carry 7 and 8 troops respectively, not to mention they're much smaller than both kurganets variants...
    Who'd have thought a new generation vehicle carried such downgrades...
    KomissarBojanchev
    KomissarBojanchev


    Posts : 1429
    Points : 1584
    Join date : 2012-08-05
    Age : 26
    Location : Varna, Bulgaria

    Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #2 Empty Re: Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #2

    Post  KomissarBojanchev Fri May 15, 2015 6:40 pm

    Armenian wrote:8 men with the Ratnik equipment and gear need as much space as 10-12 men with the old gear.
    If it had the same sillouhette as the previous BMPs then I'd agree, but the Kurganets APC approaches the same bulkiness of western AFVs, hell it's almost the same size as the BTR-50 which carried more than a dozen men if my memory serves me correctly. Although it can be said that the kurganets APC(NOT IFV) would carry less than the BTR-50 of the same size due to increased armor having twice as less troops is just to little.
    PapaDragon
    PapaDragon


    Posts : 13230
    Points : 13272
    Join date : 2015-04-26
    Location : Fort Evil, Serbia

    Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #2 Empty Re: Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #2

    Post  PapaDragon Fri May 15, 2015 7:00 pm


    Nice...  thumbsup

    Russia Reveals Its Latest Tank Is Controlled by a Playstation Gamepad

    It’s a form that has been perfected by decades and tested by millions of gamers over billions of hours - it works


    http://russia-insider.com/en/military/russia-reveals-its-latest-tank-controlled-playstation-gamepad/ri6939

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-3082276/War-games-Russia-reveals-latest-tank-controlled-PLAYSTATION-controller.html

    It is one of Russia’s newest military vehicles, designed to take soldiers into battle, while having the firepower of a tank.

    Yet for many in Russia’s military, controlling the Kurganets-25 will be easy.

    Rather than a traditional steering wheel, it uses a controller based on Sony’s Playstation gamepad.

    Scroll down for video The Kurganets-25 is an infantry fighting vehicle, which is a category of machine halfway between an armored truck and a full-size battle tank.

    The vehicle is controlled using a gamepad.

    On May 9th, the Kurganets-25 made its public debut as part of a parade commemorating the 70th anniversary of Russia’s victory in World War II.

    The new Russian armoured vehicle platform uses a device similar to a Playstation controller, the manufacturer’s vice-president told Russian media.

    The new Kurganets-25 infantry fighting vehicle uses a ‘console similar to a Sony Playstation gamepad,’ Tractor Plants vice-president Albert Bakov told state owned outlet Sputnik.

    ‘I spent two years on convincing the designers to make the console similar to a Sony Playstation gamepad, to make it easier for a young soldier to familiarize himself with it,’ Bakov said.

    According to Bakov, the idea of left-right coordination, as well as the fact that the gamepad form has been perfected for decades made it a good choice.

    The gamepad design is also safer and takes up less space than a steering wheel.

    ‘As it turns out, a steering wheel is dangerous for the rib cage during an impact and when climbing out. It takes up more space but provides nothing,’ Bakov added. ...............................................
    KoTeMoRe
    KoTeMoRe


    Posts : 4212
    Points : 4227
    Join date : 2015-04-21
    Location : Krankhaus Central.

    Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #2 Empty Re: Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #2

    Post  KoTeMoRe Sat May 16, 2015 12:33 am

    KomissarBojanchev wrote:
    Armenian wrote:8 men with the Ratnik equipment and gear need as much space as 10-12 men with the old gear.
    If it had the same sillouhette as the previous BMPs then I'd agree, but the Kurganets APC approaches the same bulkiness of western AFVs, hell it's almost the same size as the BTR-50 which carried more than a dozen men if my memory serves me correctly. Although it can be said that the kurganets APC(NOT IFV) would carry less than the BTR-50 of the same size due to increased armor  having twice as less troops is just to little.

    Obviously you haven't seen the troop compartiment of the former BMP's...nor their protection level of inherent structural trade-offs.
    collegeboy16
    collegeboy16


    Posts : 1135
    Points : 1134
    Join date : 2012-10-05
    Age : 27
    Location : Roanapur

    Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #2 Empty Re: Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #2

    Post  collegeboy16 Sat May 16, 2015 2:44 am

    KoTeMoRe wrote:
    KomissarBojanchev wrote:
    Armenian wrote:8 men with the Ratnik equipment and gear need as much space as 10-12 men with the old gear.
    If it had the same sillouhette as the previous BMPs then I'd agree, but the Kurganets APC approaches the same bulkiness of western AFVs, hell it's almost the same size as the BTR-50 which carried more than a dozen men if my memory serves me correctly. Although it can be said that the kurganets APC(NOT IFV) would carry less than the BTR-50 of the same size due to increased armor  having twice as less troops is just to little.

    Obviously you haven't seen the troop compartiment of the former BMP's...nor their protection level of inherent structural trade-offs.
    yeah, there are nice design choices like a fuel tank in the doors, a mini version of the microwave hallway in mgs4 as primary exit, ammo in the same space as everyone, and seats that are only slightly better off than squatting, etc.

    the fewer number of passengers is ok, since compared to your run-of-the-mill conscript back then the soldier now is operator as fck. What a Face
    GarryB
    GarryB


    Posts : 38695
    Points : 39191
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #2 Empty Re: Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #2

    Post  GarryB Sat May 16, 2015 9:33 am

    Do we have any actual troop capacity figures for the kurganets and boomerang?

    equally at the moment the ephocha-lite turret has a 30mm cannon and likely does not penetrate the hull so the IFV with that turret probably wont have to give up troop capacity... with 45mm or 57mm gun however they likely will.

    I rather suspect the significant increase in armour protection for the troops and the tremendous increase in fire power (ie sensors and improved aiming systems and longer ranged weapons as well as on call support from air and artillery) more than make up for reduced troop numbers.
    VladimirSahin
    VladimirSahin


    Posts : 408
    Points : 424
    Join date : 2013-11-29
    Age : 33
    Location : Florida

    Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #2 Empty Re: Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #2

    Post  VladimirSahin Sat May 16, 2015 1:35 pm

    collegeboy16 wrote:
    KoTeMoRe wrote:
    KomissarBojanchev wrote:
    Armenian wrote:8 men with the Ratnik equipment and gear need as much space as 10-12 men with the old gear.
    If it had the same sillouhette as the previous BMPs then I'd agree, but the Kurganets APC approaches the same bulkiness of western AFVs, hell it's almost the same size as the BTR-50 which carried more than a dozen men if my memory serves me correctly. Although it can be said that the kurganets APC(NOT IFV) would carry less than the BTR-50 of the same size due to increased armor  having twice as less troops is just to little.

    Obviously you haven't seen the troop compartiment of the former BMP's...nor their protection level of inherent structural trade-offs.
    yeah, there are nice design choices like a fuel tank in the doors, a mini version of the microwave hallway in mgs4 as primary exit, ammo in the same space as everyone, and seats that are only slightly better off than squatting, etc.

    the fewer number of passengers is ok, since compared to your run-of-the-mill conscript back then the soldier now is operator as fck. What a Face

    lol! lol!
    George1
    George1


    Posts : 18257
    Points : 18754
    Join date : 2011-12-22
    Location : Greece

    Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #2 Empty Re: Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #2

    Post  George1 Sat May 16, 2015 2:09 pm

    do we have any news if Naval Infantry will also take Kurganets IFV?
    Morpheus Eberhardt
    Morpheus Eberhardt


    Posts : 1925
    Points : 2032
    Join date : 2013-05-20

    Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #2 Empty Re: Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #2

    Post  Morpheus Eberhardt Sat May 16, 2015 2:49 pm

    At the parade, I didn't see any Bumerang BTRs, presumably shown in the following image.


    Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #2 TznhXqM
    Flanky
    Flanky


    Posts : 192
    Points : 197
    Join date : 2011-05-02
    Location : Slovakia

    Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #2 Empty Re: Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #2

    Post  Flanky Sat May 16, 2015 4:07 pm

    Are they developing also a light tank version of the Boomerang?
    Kind of Stryker MGS...
    Personally i think be it not for the Stryker poor terrain performance and reliability issues... the MGS would be a good idea.
    Wheeled chassis have lower maintenance costs, not so bad enviroment impact and is faster, thus providing more responsiveness to urgent deployment situations....
    2SPOOKY4U
    2SPOOKY4U


    Posts : 276
    Points : 287
    Join date : 2014-09-20

    Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #2 Empty Re: Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #2

    Post  2SPOOKY4U Sat May 16, 2015 7:04 pm

    Flanky wrote:Are they developing also a light tank version of the Boomerang?
    Kind of Stryker MGS...
    Personally i think be it not for the Stryker poor terrain performance and reliability issues... the MGS would be a good idea.
    Wheeled chassis have lower maintenance costs, not so bad enviroment impact and is faster, thus providing more responsiveness to urgent deployment situations....

    It would be a better idea for you to research the reasons why the Mobile Gun System(Based on Stryker chassis that was meant to operate on front lines) was conceived up in the first place.

    In its intended role, production run, ConOPS, and placement within force structure, represent a filling for a gap that existed within U.S. Army Ground Force Structure ever since the Cold War.

    No such vehicle is necessary for the Russian Armed Forces.
    Flanky
    Flanky


    Posts : 192
    Points : 197
    Join date : 2011-05-02
    Location : Slovakia

    Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #2 Empty Re: Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #2

    Post  Flanky Sat May 16, 2015 7:15 pm

    Well Russians have Sprut that is true however it is a tracked platform. It is ideal in regular conflicts but in Guerilla wars like those in Chechniya you need speed and responsiveness more than crosscountry capability.
    I mean mobility is important that said wheeled platform is cheaper for maintenance and much faster. Regarding the MGS it is used as supporting platform for ground operations against insurgency and guerillas...
    Russians would be good to have an equivalent of this... Sprut could be used but its caterpilars are not good for the roads, it consumes too much of fuel, maintenance is much harder and so on....
    2SPOOKY4U
    2SPOOKY4U


    Posts : 276
    Points : 287
    Join date : 2014-09-20

    Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #2 Empty Re: Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #2

    Post  2SPOOKY4U Sat May 16, 2015 7:42 pm

    Flanky wrote:Well Russians have Sprut that is true however it is a tracked platform. It is ideal in regular conflicts but in Guerilla wars like those in Chechniya you need speed and responsiveness more than crosscountry capability.
    I mean mobility is important that said wheeled platform is cheaper for maintenance and much faster. Regarding the MGS it is used as supporting platform for ground operations against insurgency and guerillas...
    Russians would be good to have an equivalent of this... Sprut could be used but its caterpilars are not good for the roads, it consumes too much of fuel, maintenance is much harder and so on....

    Laughing Laughing Laughing


    Flanky, just because the U.S. Ground Forces possess such a vehicle, does not mean the Russian Ground Forces suddenly need one.

    Such thought is consistent with shills that instantly think the Russian Forces now requires something similar to what the U.S. fields in it's inventories.

    If you believe that the Russian Armed Forces require something of the likes of the Stryker MGS, then I suggest you go here: http://www.f-16.net/

    There you find all sorts of like-minded peers.

    Again, the reason why the U.S. Ground Forces procured such a vehicle was to fill a gap, a gap that has never existed in the Soviet or Russian Ground Forces.

    Cyberspec
    Cyberspec


    Posts : 2904
    Points : 3057
    Join date : 2011-08-08
    Location : Terra Australis

    Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #2 Empty Re: Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #2

    Post  Cyberspec Sun May 17, 2015 1:35 am

    A couple of older projects for 'wheeled tank'

    Zhalo (Sting) - 85mm gun on BTR-70
    Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #2 1431631356_2s14

    Sprut-K - 125mm gun on BTR-90
    Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #2 1431631321_sprut_k

    Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #2 Tb_1_

    according to military experts, the most likely option arrangement cannon "Boomerang" will be like the tank "Armata": a fully automated uninhabited turret. It is likely that the tank sighting systems and means of active protection will be unified with the main battle tank.

    Different assumptions about the gun are made, but most likely, it will be carried out on the option 2A75, which is used in the 2S25 "Sprut-SD '. Thanks to that, the "Boomerang-Tank" firepower will be equal to the T-90A, which in principle, will be sufficient to meet the requirements of the combat missions for combined arms teams.

    Source: http://vestnik-rm.ru/news-4-12163.htm
    avatar
    AJ-47


    Posts : 205
    Points : 222
    Join date : 2011-10-05
    Location : USA

    Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #2 Empty Re: Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #2

    Post  AJ-47 Sun May 17, 2015 6:25 am

    flamming_python wrote:
    KoTeMoRe wrote:
    flamming_python wrote:

    The BMP-3 is an IFV, it's small and cramped and the turret mechanism and operator go down all the way into the hull.
    Nevetheless, it's capacity of 7 men is perfectly adequate for an IFV-class vehicle.

    I'm talking about APCs.

    The best is 9 dismount soldiers. 3 teams of 3 soldiers in each, plus squad leader.
    But 7 might be ok too. We can have 2 by 3, or 3 by 2, plus commander.

    IFV shouldn't take dismount soldiers, only the APC should do that, the IFV is for fighting only.
    It will be the escort guy for the APC.
    avatar
    AJ-47


    Posts : 205
    Points : 222
    Join date : 2011-10-05
    Location : USA

    Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #2 Empty Re: Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #2

    Post  AJ-47 Sun May 17, 2015 6:32 am

    Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #2 Boomer10

    Nice Pic. The turret looks like the turret on the ATOM.
    2SPOOKY4U
    2SPOOKY4U


    Posts : 276
    Points : 287
    Join date : 2014-09-20

    Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #2 Empty Re: Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #2

    Post  2SPOOKY4U Sun May 17, 2015 6:34 am

    AJ-47 wrote:Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #2 Boomer10

    Nice Pic. The turret looks like the turret on the ATOM.


    That is the ATOM, check out the scooter wheels.
    avatar
    Vann7


    Posts : 5385
    Points : 5485
    Join date : 2012-05-16

    Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #2 Empty Re: Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #2

    Post  Vann7 Sun May 17, 2015 9:33 am

    Cyberspec wrote:A couple of older projects for 'wheeled tank'

    Zhalo (Sting) - 85mm gun on BTR-70
    Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #2 1431631356_2s14

    Sprut-K - 125mm gun on BTR-90
    Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #2 1431631321_sprut_k

    Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #2 Tb_1_

    according to military experts, the most likely option arrangement cannon "Boomerang" will be like the tank "Armata": a fully automated uninhabited turret. It is likely that the tank sighting systems and means of active protection will be unified with the main battle tank.

    Different assumptions about the gun are made, but most likely, it will be carried out on the option 2A75, which is used in the 2S25 "Sprut-SD '. Thanks to that, the "Boomerang-Tank" firepower will be equal to the T-90A, which in principle, will be sufficient to meet the requirements of the combat missions for combined arms teams.

    Source: http://vestnik-rm.ru/news-4-12163.htm

    Indeed , i see a lot of potential in arming an apc with a heavy gun ,that can be operated either with 1 man or if the place dangerous ,dismount and control it by control remote. Imagine a boomeran with a 152mm gun ,with only 10 rounds ,that its only role is as tank destroyer and perhaps a light machine gun mounted for defense against militants near the tank..trying to capture it..

    according to wikipedia the T-90ms price is near $5 millions.. if Russia can build a purely offensive APC with a Huge deadly 152mm tank Gun.. and with a limited protection only for 30mm rounds in the front. that will cut cost dramatically ,and for example make 10-15 of them for every T-14 they build..

    The psychological effect that this will have on the enemies on the battlefield will be huge..
    because Russia for example could build 50,000 of them. and each one of them with the capability to destroy any modern tank in the west. So you could send 3 Boomerans controlled remote again 1 western tank.. and it will overwhelm it.. with a T-14 manually operated behind ,. and best of all without spending much money..and even if hit ,no loss of life and should be easy to repair.. for having low ammo and not much technology .
    collegeboy16
    collegeboy16


    Posts : 1135
    Points : 1134
    Join date : 2012-10-05
    Age : 27
    Location : Roanapur

    Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #2 Empty Re: Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #2

    Post  collegeboy16 Sun May 17, 2015 10:09 am

    Vann7 wrote:
    Indeed , i see a lot of potential in arming an apc with a heavy gun ,that can be operated either with 1 man or if the place dangerous ,dismount and control it by control remote. Imagine a boomeran with a 152mm gun ,with only 10 rounds ,that its only role is as tank destroyer and perhaps a light machine gun mounted for defense against militants near the tank..trying to capture it..

    according to wikipedia the T-90ms price is near $5 millions..  if Russia can build a purely offensive APC with a Huge deadly 152mm tank Gun.. and with a limited protection only for 30mm rounds in the front. that will cut cost dramatically ,and for example make 10-15 of them for every T-14 they build..  

    The psychological effect that this will have on the enemies on the battlefield will be huge..
    because Russia for example could build 50,000 of them. and each one of them with the capability to destroy any modern tank in the west.   So you could send 3 Boomerans controlled remote again 1 western tank.. and it will overwhelm it.. with a T-14 manually operated behind ,. and best of all without spending much money..and even if hit ,no loss of life and should be easy to repair.. for having low ammo and not much technology .
    so the closest thing to a glass cannon then? lolnope afro . can a wheeled chassis even withstand firing a 120mm/125mm gun let alone a 152mm one. from what ive read the stryker MGS has trouble shooting anywhere but the front and back relative to the hull with its 105mm gun, otherwise it risks tipping itself.
    GarryB
    GarryB


    Posts : 38695
    Points : 39191
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #2 Empty Re: Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #2

    Post  GarryB Sun May 17, 2015 10:39 am

    Strange having to repeat this over and over... but here we go...

    Armata and Boomerang and Kurganets and Typhoon are vehicle families.

    When they talk about an armata unit they mean an entire force of vehicles of all types in a normal division... MBT, IFV, APC, Command, Ambulance, transport, engineer, artillery (rocket and tube) air defence (missile, and "missile and gun"), recon, bridging, etc etc.... more than 30 different types ALL based on the Armata chassis.

    There will be armata divisions and Kurganets divisions and Boomerang divisions and typhoon divisions... that is 8 different division types because for each vehicle family there will likely be Tank divisions and Motor Rifle divisions.... so there will be tank and motor rifle Armata divisions etc etc etc.
    Flanky
    Flanky


    Posts : 192
    Points : 197
    Join date : 2011-05-02
    Location : Slovakia

    Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #2 Empty Re: Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #2

    Post  Flanky Sun May 17, 2015 1:54 pm

    2SPOOKY4U wrote:
    Flanky wrote:Well Russians have Sprut that is true however it is a tracked platform. It is ideal in regular conflicts but in Guerilla wars like those in Chechniya you need speed and responsiveness more than crosscountry capability.
    I mean mobility is important that said wheeled platform is cheaper for maintenance and much faster. Regarding the MGS it is used as supporting platform for ground operations against insurgency and guerillas...
    Russians would be good to have an equivalent of this... Sprut could be used but its caterpilars are not good for the roads, it consumes too much of fuel, maintenance is much harder and so on....

    Laughing Laughing Laughing


    Flanky, just because the U.S. Ground Forces possess such a vehicle, does not mean the Russian Ground Forces suddenly need one.

    Such thought is consistent with shills that instantly think the Russian Forces now requires something similar to what the U.S. fields in it's inventories.

    If you believe that the Russian Armed Forces require something of the likes of the Stryker MGS, then I suggest you go here: http://www.f-16.net/

    There you find all sorts of like-minded peers.

    Again, the reason why the U.S. Ground Forces procured such a vehicle was to fill a gap, a gap that has never existed in the Soviet or Russian Ground Forces.

    As you have probably found out by now... Putin needs such a vehicle even more than Americans... Im also a fan of not pursuing each and every research and development americans do... but as i said earlier "Stryker" in the ranks of Russian army would be a very good addition. Essentially a wheeled Sprut. This type of vehicle is ideal in guerilla wars, town / village sieges and so on... If Russians today would still fight the great Chechen war and would had this vehicle in their posession it would ake a big differrence. Tanks are slow and bulky, fighting a guerilla infantry needs speed and agility... That is why the Americans have stryker, Italians have Centauro, Japanese have gun on wheels, France as well as many other nations. Caterpilars on Sprut-SD are great for cross country mobility but they are slow, harder to repair and maintain and thus more costly. On the other hand Sprut-K having the cannon too huge would mean vehicle instability during fire. 125mm kicks a lot of recoil punch, so they would have to stabilize it somehow.

    Sponsored content


    Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #2 Empty Re: Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #2

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Tue Mar 19, 2024 11:43 am