Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #1

the stryker is one of the worst APCs ever built(extremely heavy weighing at 22 tons, frequent rollovers prevent it from reaching estimated top speed, huge amounts of mechanical problems and terrible fuel efficiency, max armor of only 14mm, no spall liners, poor ergonomics, atrocious cost of 11 million per unit)
so boomerang and kurganets shouldn't be compared to it instead they should be able to equal the CV90, puma, patria AFV, the new Korean IFV(I forgot its name it was K-something). Is it really possible that the BMP-3 actually protects against 30mm apsfds that can penetrate over 100mm and at the same time stay amphibious? It must have composite armor to do that. BTW does the BMP-2 berezhok have composite armor too?

Actually Stryker has done pretty damn well all things considered, in A-stan and Iraq.
CV90 is not an APC at all, and Puma is an overweight monster.

The only thing I don't like about it, is the chassis seems constantly overloaded when equipped with the kind of stuff that inevitably finds its way on a vehicle in wartime.

You have to ask yourself where to stop... there is no point planning protection for current threats, because by the time the vehicle enters service more powerful weapons will be in standard service.

It is important to keep in mind force structure... medium and light brigades are not likely to slug it out with enemy forces armed with 30mm cannons at point blank range. With modern optics and good command and communications as well as good recon, the enemy should be engaged at standoff distances which maximises the effectiveness of the base armour as well as any add on armours that might be fitted like NERA... and the best armour of all... simply moving from cover to cover.

At the end of the day the Russians will have IFVs that will stop 40mm BOFORs shells... they will be in the heavy brigades and will be armata based... there is no point in turning the medium brigades into heavy brigades...

Another point is that even if the Kurganets and boomerang-25 armour is not perfect... every vehicle in the unit will have that level of protection... even artillery and APCs, so they are going to need a lot of expensive and powerful ammo to deal with all of them. No more shredding the support vehicles with HMG fire...

Note even if 30mm APFSDS rounds penetrate the NERA and defeat the base armour... the Russian vehicles will likely be firing back 45/57mm APFSDS rounds effective to much greater ranges.

Is it really possible that the BMP-3 actually protects against 30mm apsfds that can penetrate over 100mm and at the same time stay amphibious?

30mm ammunition penetrating over 100 mm RHA ?

Very likely you've miss the 0 (zero) at the range of engagement line
The best APFSDS 30 mm ammunition now operative worldwide is at 80 mm RHA penetration level at 0 degrees of incidence at 1500 m.

And just the high resilience of BMP-3/BMP-3M in the frontal arc to 30 mm ammunition, at tactically relevant range, has been the best catalyzing element for the shift to 35 mm round in latest LAVs and for the studies to 40 CTA round.


At pag 13 you can find a clear graphic of penetration value in function of range of ammunition of different caliber with the required threshold to reliably penetrate front of BMP-2 / BMP-3 and BMP-3+


http://www.dtic.mil/ndia/2002gun/leslie.pdf

Interview with General Director of JSC "KAMAZ" Sergey Kogoghin

Armor for my son

http://www.redstar.ru/index.php/2011-07-25-15-57-07/item/8527-bronya-dlya-syna

Interesting... it said Typhoon will be for light brigades and will not be based on Boomerang.

I would have thought that the standardised suites of electronics, sensors, and weapons would provide a measure of commonality between the vehicles families, but I also thought basing the Typhoon on a lightened 4-6 wheel Boomerang design would be a good move too.

BTW after looking at the link I looked at the article about the Mig-31 at the bottom of the page... they are talking about how the Mig-31M wasn't adopted because there was no money in the 1990s and that a flying wing version with no horizontal tail surfaces was developed (like the F-16XL), and that they are looking at their options now for improving the Mig-31 and getting it back into production... exciting stuff!

GarryB wrote:Interesting... it said Typhoon will be for light brigades and will not be based on Boomerang.

They always said Light brigades will be based on Typhoon and Lynx and Tigr-M

Boomerang would be fielded by Medium Brigade

BTW after looking at the link I looked at the article about the Mig-31 at the bottom of the page... they are talking about how the Mig-31M wasn't adopted because there was no money in the 1990s and that a flying wing version with no horizontal tail surfaces was developed (like the F-16XL), and that they are looking at their options now for improving the Mig-31 and getting it back into production... exciting stuff!

Good News is today Russian Air CHief said they are building a replacement for Mig-31

They always said Light brigades will be based on Typhoon and Lynx and Tigr-M

Boomerang would be fielded by Medium Brigade

At the start they said four vehicle families... Armata, Kurganets, Boomerang, and Typhoon. Later they said the two wheeled types would be related and that it would be more like Boomerang-25 and Boomerang-10 to unifiy the designs into 3 different types instead of four.

Now they are returning to the four vehicle plan... perhaps it didn't scale down well enough.

BTW the purpose of vehicle families is unification and standardisation... unless Typhoon and Tigr-M have the same engine and design and the same protection level then everything has changed.

The purpose of unifying the brigades into vehicle families is to make sure all the vehicles have the same protection and mobility... if some are to be armoured typhoon APCs and others within the unit will be Tigr-Ms then immediately you will have two very different levels of protection...

Sorry if this has been already answered, but will the kurganets hold more than 7 people and go to the original 8(the capacity of the BMP1)or more?

You have to be more specific... the Kurganets MBT will have a crew of three. The Kurganets command vehicle might have a crew of 4-5. The Kurganets SPAAG might have a crew of four. The Kurganets air defence vehicle might have a crew of 4.

I suspect the APC model might have a crew of 2 plus a troop capacity of 8-10, while the IFV model might have a crew of 3 and a troop capacity of 6-8.

We will find out soon enough I guess.

http://twower.livejournal.com/1024786.html

Good photos and video of Typhoon-K.

The flat nose is the universal chassis, and has protection from SVD B-3 rounds.
The pike nosed vehicle comes in one variant, with 14.5 round protection all around.

http://img-fotki.yandex.ru/get/5642/94845085.cd/0_9b084_31b17b53_L.jpg

Anti-RPG mats being developed for the vehicles.

Vehicle is designed to be protected from 8kg explosives under any wheel or under the hull.

Any idea what's in the mats?

TR1 wrote:http://twower.livejournal.com/1024786.html

Good photos and video of Typhoon-K.

The flat nose is the universal chassis, and has protection from SVD B-3 rounds.
The pike nosed vehicle comes in one variant, with 14.5 round protection all around.

http://img-fotki.yandex.ru/get/5642/94845085.cd/0_9b084_31b17b53_L.jpg

Anti-RPG mats being developed for the vehicles.

Vehicle is designed to be protected from 8kg explosives under any wheel or under the hull.

So both the flat nose and pike nose will be built or one of them ? what purpose each of them serve of both are built.

Another more detailed video

Austin wrote:

TR1 wrote:http://twower.livejournal.com/1024786.html

Good photos and video of Typhoon-K.

The flat nose is the universal chassis, and has protection from SVD B-3 rounds.
The pike nosed vehicle comes in one variant, with 14.5 round protection all around.

http://img-fotki.yandex.ru/get/5642/94845085.cd/0_9b084_31b17b53_L.jpg

Anti-RPG mats being developed for the vehicles.

Vehicle is designed to be protected from 8kg explosives under any wheel or under the hull.

So both the flat nose and pike nose will be built or one of them ? what purpose each of them serve of both are built.

So far both are in testing.
The flat nose is "universal" - different modules can be placed on chassis depending on the task at hand.
The pike is the much heavier armored pure transport.

After about how many years in service can we expect the kurganets or boomerang to be available for export? Will they be only available in downgraded versions or could customers buy the real thing?

Sooner than Armata.

They will probably offered with downgraded Russian weapons, or with none at all. Customers would just add their own home grown software and weapons.

How much can u even downgrade an IFV?

I suspect any export changes will not be substantial (compared to Soviet-era monkey models, though even the export BMPs back then were hardly dumbed-down).

TR1 wrote: even the export BMPs back then were hardly dumbed-down).

Really, cause i think the Iraqis might disagree.

How were the Iraqi BMPs any worse than Soviet ones?
Pretty much identical AFAIK.

TR1 wrote:How were the Iraqi BMPs any worse than Soviet ones?
Pretty much identical AFAIK.

Iraqi BMP-1s still had malyutka ATGMs while the soviet ones had 9M111s or 9M113Ms while Iraqi BMP-2s had only 9M111s instead of the 9M113Ms soviet ones.

Soviet BMP-1s operated Malytka pretty much everywhere outside of several field modifications in A-stan.

Iraq also had access to Konkurs, it was not exactly "non-exportable" material.

So I still don't see a meaningful difference.

How were the Iraqi BMPs any worse than Soviet ones?
Pretty much identical AFAIK.

In a vehicle like a BMP where the armour is just plate armour with no special inserts the main difference would likely be that the Soviet models had anti radiation lining and the Iraqi ones didn't, so in practical terms they would not be very different at all.

The new vehicles, however, will be net centric with communication systems and sights and weapons and ammo that Russia might not clear for export for some time to come. If they do export Kurganets and Boomerang and Typhoon it will likely be with electronics and sensors and weapons to the customers requirements which may or may not include Russian export systems.

For instance if a good client like Vietnam or India asked for a Kurganets BMP with a 45 or 57mm gun then I think they would probably get it, but for the electronics suite they are developing and the vehicle family concept that these wont be exported... they will get the sensors they want and the weapons they want and the vehicles, but I suspect they wont want to adopt the vehicle family concept as such so they might buy the Boomerang APC and use it like a new BTR-80 with BMP level armour, and they might buy the Kurganets IFV and use it like a BMP-4 and they might buy an Armata MBT and use it like a T-99, but I suspect the armour modules they get will not be the same as the Russian Army modules on all the vehicle types they buy.

This is all just my opinion of course... most countries wont require the level of ammo performance that the Russian Army will require... for many the 30mm cannon will still be the best choice to arm their IFVS and the more expensive 45mm calibre ammo would simply be overkill.

There is plenty of scope for upgrading BMP-2/3, and for countries that already have such vehicles in service a bit of extra armour and a new engine makes rather more sense than trying to introduce a brand new vehicle design into service.

AlfaT8 wrote:

TR1 wrote: even the export BMPs back then were hardly dumbed-down).

Really, cause i think the Iraqis might disagree.

Yes, Iraqis would definitely disagree.......

How were the Iraqi BMPs any worse than Soviet ones?
Pretty much identical AFAIK.

Obviously not.

Влади́мир Богда́нович Резу́н (alias Виктор Суворов) itself say that about the subject

I have seen two variants of the BMP-1 infantry combat vehicle-one which is issued to the Soviet army and another which is intended for the Soviet Union's Arab friends. I counted sixty-three simplifications which made the second `monkey-model' different from the original version. Among the most important of these were: The 73mm gun has no loading or round selection equipment. Whereas in the Soviet version the gunnerjust presses the appropriate buttons and the round which he requires slides into the barrel, in the simplified model all of this has to be done by hand, and furthermore, the gun is not stabilised. The turret is rotated and the gun is raised mechanically. In the Soviet version this is done electrically-the mechanical system is there only as a back-up. The `export' version is armed with the Malyutka rocket, the Soviet one with the `Malyutka-M', which differs from the other model in having an automatic target guidance system. The `monkey-model' is without the lead internal lining on the walls, which protects the crew against penetrating radiation and against flying fragments of armour in the event of a direct hit. The optical system is greatly simplified, as is the communications equipment, there is no automatic radiation or gas detector, there is neither an automatic hermetic sealing system nor an air filtration system, for use in conditions of very heavy contamination, no automatic topographical fixation system is fitted and many other systems are missing.

When one of these `monkey-models' fell into the hands of Western specialists, they naturally gained a completely false impression of the true combat capabilities of the BMP-1 and of Soviet tanks. For what they were looking at was no more than a casing, or a container, like an empty money box which is of no value without its contents.

The Soviet Union is currently making deliveries abroad of T-72 tanks, MIG-23 fighters and TU-22 bombers. But these are different from the models with which the Soviet Army has armed itself. When one of a man's pockets contains banknotes and the other simply holds pieces of paper, it is quite impossible to tell which is which from the outside.

The current Soviet policy concerning equipment is a wise one-to amass first-class but very simple equipment in quantities sufficient for the first few weeks of a war. If the war continues, equipment will be produced on an enormous scale, but in variants which have been simplified to the greatest possible extent. Experience of producing both standard and `monkey' models is being gained in peacetime; the simpler variants are being sold to the `brothers' and `friends' of the USSR as the very latest equipment available.

We are considering Suvorov a reliable source now?