Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #1

Personally, If I was official responsible for procurement, I'd do my best to ensure, that this abonimation never sees production line. Even by appearance, VPK-3924 Medved looks superior in every aspect.

Whats the issue?

Looks perfectly fine to me.

"even by appearance"... what other information are you basing your opinion on?

I personally would want to know rather more about it before I pass judgement... what were the design goals... were they met fully... can the troops break it in a day or will it take longer? etc etc

Plus what sort of weapon add ons can it be fitted with/for.

Currently, I'm judging this vehicle by appearance only.
My harsh words came from the fact, that I don't think this kamaz typhoon was thought-out well enough.

It has 4 doors. That gives it the troop capacity of like what, 5-6 people? This is on par with the much smaller and cheaper LYNX  

Also, this configuration doesn't really allow you to have modular vehicles, such as 6x6 version (and given the recent modularity hype in Russian military, wouldn't that be the grounds for immediate dismissal?).

In addition, it's components appear to be based on that 6x6 typhoon truck. I was under the impression, that Russian military opted for Ural version instead (but I'm not sure). So it would be highly likely, that this vehicle would be hardly compatible with any other vehicle in service. In that case, wouldn't basing the vehicle under something already in service (like, kamaz mustang series) be much more appropriate?



These are, I think, the main issues with this vehicle that I'm concerned about. Also, I believe there are a couple of minor issues.

The isn't Typhoon, of the Armata, Kurganets, Boomerang, Typhoon families...

This thing looks like a far more serious MRAP than any other 4x4 Russia makes.

Tiger, Scoprion, Lynx, Volk, all that stuff is much smaller and I would bet far less effective in the MRAP role.

If the 6x6 trucks are anything to go on it will have a serious applique armor package as well.

TR1 wrote:This thing looks like a far more serious MRAP than any other 4x4 Russia makes.

Tiger, Scoprion, Lynx, Volk, all that stuff is much smaller and I would bet far less effective in the MRAP role.

If the 6x6 trucks are anything to go on it will have a serious applique armor package as well.

Sorry, but I don't really follow....

First of, this kamaz tyhoon doesn't look like MRAP in the first place. And if the more conventional protection measures are used, it won't have mine protection that much different, than the poor GAZ Volk you are so hurrying to dismiss   And  I'm not even bothering to compare it to actual dedicated MRAPs, like RG-31 Nyala, for example.

Well, to think better , I could be wrong about that. The best way to know is to find the picture that could determine its hull shape (usually rear view pictures are the best for that).


To GarryB:
It could be a typhoon, or it could be an ice-cream bus, that doesn't make my points any less relevant.

To be honest I don't really see where you are coming from with any of your criticism, but let's just wait for firm specifications to arrive for this baby.
And while we are at it, for Volk to pass testing, and Tigr 6a to actually be adopted.

TR1 wrote:To be honest I don't really see where you are coming from with any of your criticism, but let's just wait for firm specifications to arrive for this baby.
And while we are at it, for Volk to pass testing, and Tigr 6a to actually be adopted.

As I mentioned earlier, I don't think that it's actually suitable for military requirements (for Russia, at least). I'm even starting to think, that this vehicle was actually created more for commercial users, than military.

So what are Russian requirements?
It clearly has V shaped hull, so what did You expect- ERA like on Israeli one? You can even find a video where it's almost stripped down in a factory when they are showing armored trucks.
Russia is not a flatland, have You ever considered where these MRAPs will go? Mountainous regions, few roads, ice, snow, impassible dirt. MRAP vehicles who are considered offroad worthy look similar. What costumer will want to buy MRAPs? Russian internal troops arr the ones who need this type of vehicle the most or do expect NATO troops will use IEDs
(actually I was given a course on improvised explosives, but it was in civil defence, not in army)

Regular wrote:So what are Russian requirements?

The unique "problem" of this vehicle is exactly in this forum , and more precisely , in the wronged section wherein it has been included : Russian Army -Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread-.

Bring it in the "correct" section : Russian Airborne (VDV Elite Corps) , and majority of the questions on this vehicle will instantly lose any sense.

I think all the hype about MRAP came to late. It would have saved lots of lives 8-10 years ago.
Still, beter now then never. You never know what can happen in the south.

And competition is a good thing. Even if it doesn't go in to full scale production. Rumour has it that Kazakhstan is interested in this kind of vehicle.

To flaming pyton:
I think, scorpion, volk and medved already fit those niches nicely.




To Regular:

"So what are Russian requirements?"

If I had to guess, something along the lines of volk, or medved, depending on its intended role.





"It clearly has V shaped hull"

Could you provide me with a picture, or video, where you could clearly see that v-hull? Because as of now, NOTHING indicates, that it actually has one.   





"so what did You expect- ERA like on Israeli one?"

No. Depending on whether it would go for army or mvd units, I'd expected it to outperform volk or medved, respectively, in layout. It doesn't.

You know it doesn't from 3 pics?

Come on man.

Making an analysis on interior seating based on doors is laughable as well, no offense.

Just weight wise I think it will be evident this is not in the same class as the smaller 4x4s.

Btw, V-hull is not panacea. Many MRAPs have a much more complicated bottom to absorb force rather than simple V-hull.

To TR1:

"You know it doesn't from 3 pics?"
I didn't say that. I only said that we cannot know for sure.





"Making an analysis on interior seating based on doors is laughable as well, no offense."

No offense taken. Feel free to criticize me at any any time .  
Regarding the seating, at the side picture you could quite clearly see the rows of seats across the vehicle, which clearly indicates the same layout as in, let's say, civilian cars. And that means, 5-6 seats.






"Just weight wise I think it will be evident this is not in the same class as the smaller 4x4s."

I would place it in the same weight class as Medved.





"Btw, V-hull is not panacea. Many MRAPs have a much more complicated bottom to absorb force rather than simple V-hull."

Why, of course    v-hull puts quite a few space and weight penalties, and many other solutions are considered to reduce those penalties. However, in terms of mine protection, V-shape is still the king (for example, M65 LYNX can survive 6kg TNT blast, but RG-31 Nyala could take 14 kg no problem).






Although I don't know for sure, I could guess, that KAMAZ typhoon achieves its mine protection by having a bent bottom, which IS NOT directly attached to the crew compartment (also could have some filler, maybe ceramics, between them). That bottom creates a bathtub like shape, which could also be filled with fuel tanks, ACs, etc., acting as additional armor. And crew compartment is probably structurally separate from the rest of the vehicle. Incidentally, if that's the case, it would probably refute my claims about typhoon's unmodular nature   .

http://panzerbar.livejournal.com/1451115.html

По имеющейся информации, рассматривается возможность закупки партии из 20-30 автомобилей 12 местного КамАЗ-53949 для опытной войсковой эксплуатации.

12 seats.

TR1 wrote:http://panzerbar.livejournal.com/1451115.html

По имеющейся информации, рассматривается возможность закупки партии из 20-30 автомобилей 12 местного КамАЗ-53949 для опытной войсковой эксплуатации.

12 seats.

Thanks for the link

To be frank, I never saw that small window, so didn't actually consider this kind of configuration. Influenced by Polish Zubr, perhaps?

flamming_python wrote:Looks like a V-shaped hull.

Actually the combo of Scorpion and Volk can round off the light vehicle segment quite nicely; and can step up to replace the current UAZ-469 and Iveco/Tigr/Vodnik/BRDM-2 vehicle porridge over the next 5-10 years.

Although the Medved looks like a formidable vehicle, so Kamaz's 4x4 offering here will face some stiff competition for the MRAP 4x4 class. May the best car win. We also have the BMP-97 4x4 here as well, albeit it has its own seperate niche so it will be needed regardless.

I don't even know where the Bumerang-10s will fit in into all this..

When we move up a weight class it's much the same situation; too many competing and similar designs. Ural Typhoon, Kamaz Typhoon, BPM-97 6x6, Bumerang-10 again perhaps, etc...

Uh, are our understandings about V-hull the same?

V-hull usually occupies a large part of the vehicle's hull.
A couple of examples:

RG-31 Nyala:
http://www.toadmanstankpictures.com/rg-31_mk5e_08.jpg
Medved:
http://77rus.smugmug.com/Military/Demonstration-in-Bronnitsy/i-CF4hcTg/0/L/Bronnitsy006-L.jpg

As you can see, the shape of v-hull is most easily seen in the rear view pictures, so far, we haven't seen one for Kamaz typhoon.

flamming_python wrote:

etaepsilonk wrote:

flamming_python wrote:Looks like a V-shaped hull.

Actually the combo of Scorpion and Volk can round off the light vehicle segment quite nicely; and can step up to replace the current UAZ-469 and Iveco/Tigr/Vodnik/BRDM-2 vehicle porridge over the next 5-10 years.

Although the Medved looks like a formidable vehicle, so Kamaz's 4x4 offering here will face some stiff competition for the MRAP 4x4 class. May the best car win. We also have the BMP-97 4x4 here as well, albeit it has its own seperate niche so it will be needed regardless.

I don't even know where the Bumerang-10s will fit in into all this..

When we move up a weight class it's much the same situation; too many competing and similar designs. Ural Typhoon, Kamaz Typhoon, BPM-97 6x6, Bumerang-10 again perhaps, etc...

Uh, are our understandings about V-hull the same?

V-hull usually occupies a large part of the vehicle's hull.
A couple of examples:

RG-31 Nyala:
http://www.toadmanstankpictures.com/rg-31_mk5e_08.jpg
Medved:
http://77rus.smugmug.com/Military/Demonstration-in-Bronnitsy/i-CF4hcTg/0/L/Bronnitsy006-L.jpg

As you can see, the shape of v-hull is most easily seen in the rear view pictures, so far, we haven't seen one for Kamaz typhoon.

Looks like a clear V to me on the link that TR1 gave

Your pictures on the other hand don't show the V shape conclusively; I can't see shit captain!

Oh? You cannot see the pictures?

Or you just cannot see the hull shaping? In that case, look at the lines around the rear doors. They should be clearly visible.

Can't find video where I've seen it being almost "naked" with open bonnet. But hey tell me what's in the red and blue circles then?

Bigger image

Bigger image

Now look at Oshkosh M-ATV. Not comparing those vehicles, but You can see similarities in hull design. Both of them focus on mine protection while being offload capable. Ofcourse, they might not be like British Foxhound, but armies fight conventional war too, there would be no sense having uber mraps replacing wheeled transport as a whole.