Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #2

    Share
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16315
    Points : 16946
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #2

    Post  GarryB on Sun Apr 30, 2017 11:01 am

    They are developing suites for each vehicle type.

    In other words the BMP or IFV vehicle will have a specific turret with specific sensors and weapons and equipment and will be fitted to all vehicle families... ie the BMP Armata will likely have a 57mm high velocity gun and missiles and grenade launchers... and so will the Boomerang BMP and the Kurganets BMP and the Typhoon BMP.

    Obviously there are limitations... the 10-15 ton Typhoon might not have a 125mm gun armed MBT... it might instead have a 57mm gun armed gun platform, or might even have a 120mm gun/mortar armed gun vehicle. The 152mm calibre artillery model might instead have a 120mm rifled gun/mortar too.

    Equally instead of Pantsir-SM versions of Typhoon there might be SOSNA-R versions of Typhoon...

    The different types will be in development for all vehicle families... I would think that by 2021 they will have most vehicle types ready for initial production at least.


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order
    avatar
    George1

    Posts : 10245
    Points : 10733
    Join date : 2011-12-22
    Location : Greece

    Re: Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #2

    Post  George1 on Mon May 01, 2017 1:35 am

    4 years from now?? i think its too long period.


    _________________
    "There's no smoke without fire.", Georgy Zhukov

    avatar
    Benya

    Posts : 490
    Points : 494
    Join date : 2016-06-05
    Location : Budapest, Hungary

    Re: Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #2

    Post  Benya on Mon May 01, 2017 9:54 am

    George1 wrote:4 years from now?? i think its too long period.

    Heads up George, we might see an initial batch of 50-100 vehicles, which would be produced for field testing.

    The situation would be similar to the Armata's case. The Russian MoD ordered a hundred of them to be produced by 2018, and if both the MoD is satisfied with the results of the tests, they will approve its serial production. If not, it will be sent back to UVZ for some rework/fine tuning.
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16315
    Points : 16946
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #2

    Post  GarryB on Tue May 02, 2017 5:53 am

    By the time they start proper serial production they will need to have at least 20 different vehicle base types ready for production.

    I doubt they will start by producing Armata MBTs and replacing T-90s with these tanks, and producing Kurganets IFVs and replacing the BMPs with these vehicles.

    It would be more logical to make Armata units and Kurganets units and boomerang units, which means you need all the various vehicle types ready for production to place an entire Armata division in service, or an entire Kurganets or Boomerang division in service too.

    They will likely start with a testing force first and then start producing the vehicles to complete a div at a time after that.


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order

    marcellogo

    Posts : 71
    Points : 75
    Join date : 2012-08-02

    Re: Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #2

    Post  marcellogo on Wed May 03, 2017 9:34 pm

    Cyrus the great wrote:
    GarryB wrote:The 57mm rifled guns can still use sabot rounds... they are just fitted with slip rings.

    The new 57mm guns for IFVs in Russia are rifled because the HE rounds they fire benefit from spin stabilisation, while the HEAT anti armour rounds they will fire will likely be guided so rifling does not matter.

    Because of the size of the round a good APHE round would be interesting for use against lighter vehicles and fortifications.

    Making tank calibre guns smoothbore makes sense because APFSDS rounds don't like being spun and neither do HEAT rounds. The other rounds are guided missiles... which don't like being spun much eitehr, and HE rounds that can be fin stabilised.

    For smaller calibres APFSDS rounds can have slip rings that prevent the rifling from spinning the projectile, but HE rounds benefit from spin stabilisation and guided shells will soon stop spinning when their control fins pop out after being fired.



    Thank you so much, Garry. The 57mm gun will provide a very powerful boost to the offensive capabilities of Russia's AFVs. Why don't the other armies in the West put the Bofors 57mm or Italy's Oto Melara 60mm hypervelocity gun into service on their AFVs?

    I assume that these guns can also use slip-rings.

    We are developing the OTOMAT i.e. the wheeled version of our 76/62mm SUPER RAPIDO gun, with STRALES guided PFHEFSDS round.

    Differently from the earlier tracked version we though about in the late eighties it would not be a strict SPAAG but a multirole vehicle able to engage both air than land target (and maybe also a light artillery piece using instead the Vulcano rounds, similar in design but intended for indirect fire).
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16315
    Points : 16946
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #2

    Post  GarryB on Thu May 04, 2017 11:12 am

    I assume that these guns can also use slip-rings.

    Well technically it is the ammo that has the slip rings.

    I actually don't know if the new 57mm gun is a smoothbore or rifled.

    For and IFV the primary rounds will be APFSDS and HEAT for use against Armour with a backup common round being guided missile.

    None of these three types benefit from rifling.

    But then for an AA gun HE rounds of the sensor fused type would benefit from spin stabilisation.

    A smoothbore would make the barrel lighter and cheaper, and it will generate a higher muzzle velocity for a given length.

    It is easier to clean too.

    I don't think it makes sense to have two different types of gun and therefore two different types of ammo.

    (smoothbore guns need fin stabilised rounds, while rifled rounds need slip rings and control fins for guided rounds)

    Of course despite the apparent standardisation within the Russian and Soviet military the Air Force tends to use electric primed ammo, while the Army tends to use percussion primed rounds.

    The resulting situation is that although on paper the 30 x 165mm round is standard in the Russian military a MiG-29 pilot could not land next to a BMP-3 unit and borrow some 30mm cannon ammo. It is the same for the Navy.... those 30mm gatlings use different ammo too.


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order

    Vann7

    Posts : 3452
    Points : 3570
    Join date : 2012-05-16

    Re: Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #2

    Post  Vann7 on Fri May 12, 2017 10:37 pm

    George1 wrote:4 years from now?? i think its too long period.

    an incredibly long one and completely foolish of Russia military.
    They are already in a war in Syria and Ukraine ,how much worse things needs
    to be for Russia government realize , they are already at war with NATO major
    powers ,but now is done by proxy and without an official declaration.

    Then Montenegro joins NATO and how long after that for a new war
    to start in Serbia ? Russia is not really taking seriously the real problems they face in
    the world. im afraid. No it will be a matter of time , The west will start
    another conflict forcing Russia to interfere. and those Armata tanks could make
    a major different in human lives lost.
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16315
    Points : 16946
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #2

    Post  GarryB on Sun May 14, 2017 10:26 am

    It is not just a case of putting the Armata MBT into service.

    These systems operate together within a battlefield network to share information.

    It is not just a case of producing 2,000 Armata MBTs and putting them into units replacing the T-72/90 vehicle previously there.

    They need to fully develop an entire family of vehicles based on the Armata. They will also develop an entire family of vehicles based on Kurganets, boomerang, and Typhoon... that is hundreds of different vehicle types that will replace all previous model vehicle types... not just T-90, BMP-3, BTR-82, BRDM-2... we are also talking about replacing all the MTLB based command vehicles, artillery tractors, BTR and BMP based vehicles and the T-80 based MSTA artillery vehicles and air defence vehicles etc etc.

    Of course it will take 4 years... probably 10 years to get close to completion.

    But that is OK, because they are starting a process even NATO countries have not started and seem to be no where near starting... unified vehicle families...


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order
    avatar
    Book.

    Posts : 704
    Points : 767
    Join date : 2015-05-08
    Location : Oregon, USA

    Re: Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #2

    Post  Book. on Thu May 18, 2017 6:13 am

    GAZ Group Production Technologies
    Published on May 10, 2017

    In the last few years, GAZ Group has invested about $2 bln. USD into its technological modernization.


    YMZ 530 150-330HP Diesel Engine.

    Catalog:
    YMZ V8 450HP - Good for Truck, Mrap, Armor, BTR
    YMZ 240 500HP - Bmp3, farm track?
    YMZ 780 750hp - For Kurga 25. Boomer. Bmp3
    YMZ 840 800HP For Kurga 25. Boomer. Bmp3

    Kurga 25 + Boomer YMZ 780 Engine:



    Dual use Civil + Mility tech

    Cyrus the great

    Posts : 269
    Points : 279
    Join date : 2015-06-12

    Re: Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #2

    Post  Cyrus the great on Tue Jun 13, 2017 4:59 am


    I wonder if the Russians will incorporate a coaxial 30mm (as seen on the BMP-3) alongside the 57mm on the T-15 Armata and the Kurganets-25. A 57mm grenade launcher on top of the turret would be ideal - especially in urban egagements.
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16315
    Points : 16946
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #2

    Post  GarryB on Tue Jun 13, 2017 11:47 am

    A 57mm grenade launcher would make more sense, or perhaps a 23mm cannon in the form of a KPB with the light 23 x 115mm ammo... low velocity, low recoil, compact ammo able to be carried in large numbers and fired in bursts to cover an area in HE shells rapidly... in fact instead of a KPB I would use the GSh-23 from the Hind for its high rate of fire and accuracy.


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order
    avatar
    0nillie0

    Posts : 63
    Points : 65
    Join date : 2016-05-15
    Age : 30
    Location : Flanders, Belgium

    Re: Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #2

    Post  0nillie0 on Tue Jun 13, 2017 12:35 pm

    GarryB wrote:A 57mm grenade launcher would make more sense, or perhaps a 23mm cannon in the form of a KPB with the light 23 x 115mm ammo... low velocity, low recoil, compact ammo able to be carried in large numbers and fired in bursts to cover an area in HE shells rapidly... in fact instead of a KPB I would use the GSh-23 from the Hind for its high rate of fire and accuracy.

    IMHO it would make the most sense to add the Gsh-23 as a coaxial weapon system to the 57mm cannon. As GarryB stated, its high rate of fire combined with reasonable accuracy would make for a devastating weapon capable of suppressing personnel and light armored targets. It makes more sense to place it under the protection of the turret, coaxial to the main weapon, where more ammo can be stored as opposed to a turret roof mounted remote weapon assembly. As a third coaxial weapon, a PKM machine gun could be implemented.

    For additional firepower, an optional remote weapon station could be integrated on the roof of the remote controlled turret. This could be equipped with the 57mm grenade launcher in combination with another light machine gun. This would give the second crew member the ability to quickly target and suppress independently. Alternatively a dedicated anti UAV weapon could be integrated in the RWS in such combat environments where it would be required.

    A question : Could there be a shell capable of anti-tank use? Or would the vehicle still be dependent on externally mounted ATGM rather than gun launched shells? I would imagine the 57mm is not suited for developing effective GLATGM systems.
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16315
    Points : 16946
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #2

    Post  GarryB on Wed Jun 14, 2017 12:01 pm

    If you mount a 57mm grenade launcher it would need independent elevation but could be mounted to point with the 57mm high velocity main gun so the gunner can fire one or the other.
    A 23mm cannon would also benefit with independent elevation but would not need to traverse on its own as the targets you would use each of these three weapons against would not be the same.

    The 57mm main gun with high velocity ammo would need to use unguided APFSDS rounds to defeat enemy IFVs but would be inadequate to take on MBT even with guided rounds unless they were HEAT armed diving top attack rounds.

    A missile like Kornet would be needed to engage enemy MBTs.

    I would think a belt feed of 57mm grenades would make coaxial design more appealing, while the small size of the 23mm rounds means an externally mounted RWS might be more practical, but of course the rate of fire of the twin barrel 23mm gun would mean large amounts of ammo would be needed.

    In use a short burst of 5-20 rounds would allow area targets to be engaged rapidly as the shells would arrive in a cluster on target with shrapnel everywhere... it would be devastating to any troops in the open...

    Note South African pilots said the twin barrel 23mm cannon was a very accurate weapon... they tested them when South Africa changed to a democracy.

    It seems the low recoil allows very accurate fire in short bursts even with a very high rate of fire.

    The projectiles have a heavy HE payload for such a small calibre... they use the same projectile as used in the Shilka but being 23 x 115mm instead of 23 x 152mm they have a much lower velocity.

    The Shilka has high velocity rounds to engage fast moving small targets. The Hind and the MiG-23 has low velocity rounds at enormous rates of fire and heavy projectiles to hit small fast moving targets (in the same way a shotgun blast is more effective than a bullet stream)


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order
    avatar
    kvs

    Posts : 3035
    Points : 3160
    Join date : 2014-09-11
    Location : Canuckistan

    Re: Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #2

    Post  kvs on Wed Jun 14, 2017 4:39 pm

    The YMZ-780 engine spec about "motor resource" of 2500 hours is strange. Diesel engines are notoriously low maintenance and
    long lived. Why would this engine require service after about one year of use? The only service it would need is an oil and filter
    change. This is not "motor resource", this is standard procedure for all engines (six months for gasoline ones). They make it
    sound like the engine needs an overhaul every year. Total nonsense.

    Cyrus the great

    Posts : 269
    Points : 279
    Join date : 2015-06-12

    Re: Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #2

    Post  Cyrus the great on Fri Jun 16, 2017 1:14 am

    GarryB wrote:A 57mm grenade launcher would make more sense, or perhaps a 23mm cannon in the form of a KPB with the light 23 x 115mm ammo... low velocity, low recoil, compact ammo able to be carried in large numbers and fired in bursts to cover an area in HE shells rapidly... in fact instead of a KPB I would use the GSh-23 from the Hind for its high rate of fire and accuracy.

    If the Russians incorporate the Gsh-23 as a coaxial gun (like on the BMP-3) on a 57mm armed T-15, the amount of 23 X 115 rounds that could be accomodated in the turret  would be contingent on the size of the turret that the T-15 Armata ends up with.

    It would be ideal to have 100 mm high velocity 57mm rounds and 800 23 X 115 rounds in the turret and four Kornet missiles on the sides, provided that the turret does not become too large and take away armour from more vital areas.

    Perhaps a layout in which GSh-23 guns are placed on each side of the turret with their own ammunition bins would be ideal.  This would be incredible if they can do this without taking up the space of the Kornets on the turret side. How many 23 X 115 rounds do you think each ammunition bin could carry?


    Last edited by Cyrus the great on Fri Jun 16, 2017 9:15 am; edited 1 time in total
    avatar
    KomissarBojanchev

    Posts : 1170
    Points : 1329
    Join date : 2012-08-05
    Age : 19
    Location : Varna, Bulgaria

    Re: Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #2

    Post  KomissarBojanchev on Fri Jun 16, 2017 5:04 am

    0nillie0 wrote:
    GarryB wrote:A 57mm grenade launcher would make more sense, or perhaps a 23mm cannon in the form of a KPB with the light 23 x 115mm ammo... low velocity, low recoil, compact ammo able to be carried in large numbers and fired in bursts to cover an area in HE shells rapidly... in fact instead of a KPB I would use the GSh-23 from the Hind for its high rate of fire and accuracy.

    IMHO it would make the most sense to add the Gsh-23 as a coaxial weapon system to the 57mm cannon. As GarryB stated, its high rate of fire combined with reasonable accuracy would make for a devastating weapon capable of suppressing personnel and light armored targets. It makes more sense to place it under the protection of the turret, coaxial to the main weapon, where more ammo can be stored as opposed to a turret roof mounted remote weapon assembly. As a third coaxial weapon, a PKM machine gun could be implemented.

    For additional firepower, an optional remote weapon station could be integrated on the roof of the remote controlled turret. This could be equipped with the 57mm grenade launcher in combination with another light machine gun. This would give the second crew member the ability to quickly target and suppress independently. Alternatively a dedicated anti UAV weapon could be integrated in the RWS in such combat environments where it would be required.

    A question : Could there be a shell capable of anti-tank use? Or would the vehicle still be dependent on externally mounted ATGM rather than gun launched shells? I would imagine the 57mm is not suited for developing effective GLATGM systems.

    Of course it makes sense to add heavy AGLs and an autocannon as a secondary coaxial weapon. But judging by the design of the armata, there's a big chance that there wont be more than a puny PKT or 40mm balkan AGL. For some reason Russians don't like putting secondary guns on their AFVs that aren't larger than rifle calibre MGs while other countries have experimented more with them, while for example the french have been putting 12.7mm browning coaxials on their leclercs and the czechs made the T-72M2 Moderna which had a 2A42 strapped on to it.
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16315
    Points : 16946
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #2

    Post  GarryB on Fri Jun 16, 2017 12:05 pm

    If the Russians incorporate the Gsh-23 as a coaxial gun (like on the BMP-3) on a 57mm armed T-15, the amount of 23 X 115 rounds that could be accomodated in the turret would be contingent on the size of the turret that the T-15 Armata ends up with.

    Being and IFV it will still need guided ATGMs, so Kornet or Ataka or something like that would still be needed.

    Personally I would fill the area below the turret ring with 57mm rounds... 150-250 would be ideal IMHO, but that will likely fill the area completely. Therefore I would make the 23mm cannon coaxial and have an ammo drum behind the rear of the turret with 400-800 rounds... the 23mm rounds being much smaller than 30mm BMP rounds and would take up rather less room.

    The risk of them cooking off if hit by enemy fire would be low so external storage or secondary ammo should be OK.

    If the Russians incorporate the Gsh-23 as a coaxial gun (like on the BMP-3) on a 57mm armed T-15, the amount of 23 X 115 rounds that could be accomodated in the turret would be contingent on the size of the turret that the T-15 Armata ends up with.

    The rate of fire of the GSh-23 is enormous... there would be no advantage to having two unless the aim is over kill.

    The aviation gunpod using the same cannon weighs about 220kg, where the gun and 250 rounds of ammo weighs about 145kg.

    The 6 barrel gatling gunpod with 500 rounds weighs 260kg with gun and ammo, so the ammo is compact and light, as are the guns that fire them.

    For some reason Russians don't like putting secondary guns on their AFVs that aren't larger than rifle calibre MGs while other countries have experimented more with them, while for example the french have been putting 12.7mm browning coaxials on their leclercs and the czechs made the T-72M2 Moderna which had a 2A42 strapped on to it.

    Except for BMP-3 with 100mm rifled gun and 30mm cannon, or the BMP-2 upgrades with 30mm cannon and 30mm grenade launchers mounted to the rear of the turrets... and of course ATGMs.

    In combat a machine gun can be rather useful and can carry a rather larger amount of ready to fire ammo than a grenade launcher or heavier weapon.

    The T-10M has a 14.5mm coaxial HMG and a roof mounted HMG that replaced the 12.7mm weapons used in both positions on the T-10 tank.

    The reality is that many targets appear within about 1km where a rifle calibre machine gun is still very useful.

    Most Soviet/Russian APCs have HMG calibre main guns, so there is no shortage. The 14.5mm HMGs are very similar to western 20mm cannons with lighter HE rounds but much better armour penetration performance.


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order

    Mindstorm

    Posts : 771
    Points : 952
    Join date : 2011-07-20

    Re: Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #2

    Post  Mindstorm on Tue Jul 04, 2017 9:36 am


    Interesting interview with Director of «ВПК» Александр Красовицкий.


    Interesting points about unified platform "Boomerang":


    - It can be remotely controled, at the point that it could be named a "robot".

    - Its level of protection against precision guided weapons ,including in the upper emisphere, is astonishing ,to the point that, in its word, Boomerang would result practically "indestructible".

    - «ВПК» was present at "Балтийское дерби" and was ready to support requests from the Marines, including increase in speed (ostensively floating one) to allow realization of landing missions from over-the-horizon (60 km) with increased crew. Likely that mean a marine-optimized version with modified propulsion and internal arrangement.


    http://iz.ru/611287/aleksei-ramm-dmitrii-litovkin/bronetransporter-bumerang-eto-kosmos

    avatar
    Big_Gazza

    Posts : 711
    Points : 731
    Join date : 2014-08-25
    Location : Melbourne, Australia

    Re: Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #2

    Post  Big_Gazza on Fri Aug 11, 2017 6:55 am

    Alexey Khlopotov is coming unglued.... check out this absurdity...

    http://gurkhan.blogspot.com.au/2017/08/blog-post_10.html

    Russia failed to develop the newest BMP

    The project of the Russian BMP "Kurganets-25" was unsuccessful. Such a statement was made by the former deputy chief engineer of the Kurgan machine-building plant for serial production of the BMP, Danil Relin. The specialist's words are transmitted by the portal "Kurgan and Kurgan".
    "The project" Kurganets 25 "was unsuccessful, a new machine is needed, and therefore, a technical task for its development. But who should make it - is unclear, "- said Rhelin.

    Relin made his statement at a meeting of the City Council of Veterans during the discussion of the situation around Kurganmashzavod. According to the expert, the company can save either the development of new military equipment, or a deep modernization. At the moment the plant is declared bankrupt. For the first time BMP "Kurganets-25" was demonstrated on May 9, 2015 at the parade on Victory Day. It was supposed that this technique would replace the current infantry armored vehicles used by Russia's armed forces. Officially, nothing was reported about the failure of the project. According to plans, the BMP was to enter mass production in 2017-2018. In 2015 it was reported that the main disadvantage of "Kurganets-25" is a high profile. In particular, these observations are related to the fact that the deadlines for the development of the BMP were shifted by a year.


    Are we supposed to really believe that the Kurganets silhouette height is an issue? You think this would not have been considered earlier? I dunno, maybe like the at the fucking PRELIMINARY DESIGN stage? Would the project have proceeded as far as it has if vehicle height was such a concern????

    And this business about KMZ being "bankrupt"? Its clear that so-called "bankruptcy" for state-owned MIC enterprises doesn't work like private companies. It just means that KMZs current drip-feed of funds isn't enough and needs to be increased. The essential workforce and factory managers will keep on keeping on while the replaceable executives and accountants sort out the tawdry real-world necessity of finding money from the Feds.
    avatar
    miketheterrible

    Posts : 1117
    Points : 1117
    Join date : 2016-11-06

    Re: Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #2

    Post  miketheterrible on Fri Aug 11, 2017 1:14 pm

    The company is undergoing bankruptcy but this is under the guise of the government and rostec. Rostec stated that they will acquire the company and then merge it with Uralvagonzavod in order to create an "armored holding" but will only do so when the debt issue of the company is resolved (they don't want to have an asset they just acquired cost them dearly). So after it is declared officially bankrupt, rostec will acquire them and merge it.

    Kurganetz isn't a failure. The guy is unhinged probably about something at the company. In the end, they will make it. Actually, it uses the universal platform so that would make Armata a failure but it isn't. Contrary, it is the most anticipated weapon to eventually enter service.
    avatar
    PapaDragon

    Posts : 5033
    Points : 5141
    Join date : 2015-04-26
    Location : Fort Evil, Serbia

    Re: Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #2

    Post  PapaDragon on Fri Aug 11, 2017 1:44 pm

    Same guy who was fired from Kurgan plant is talking shit about that plant's product? Wow, color me shocked...

    Seriously, I have sent folks being salty, especially here in Serbia but Russians are taking it to next level when it comes to salt. Do they even have concept of dignity there? I fucked up so now I will talk shit about everyone? Grow up bitches, all of you... Jesus....

    Besides what is so wrong and faulty with Kurganets? Let's get a rundown:

    1) It moves

    2) It floats

    3) It shoots

    4) It's armoured

    5) It doesn't require crew of midgets to operate it

    Looks fine to me...
    avatar
    Big_Gazza

    Posts : 711
    Points : 731
    Join date : 2014-08-25
    Location : Melbourne, Australia

    Re: Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #2

    Post  Big_Gazza on Fri Aug 11, 2017 1:44 pm

    miketheterrible wrote:The company is undergoing bankruptcy but this is under the guise of the government and rostec. Rostec stated that they will acquire the company and then merge it with Uralvagonzavod in order to create an "armored holding" but will only do so when the debt issue of the company is resolved (they don't want to have an asset they just acquired cost them dearly).  So after it is declared officially bankrupt, rostec will acquire them and merge it.

    Kurganetz isn't a failure. The guy is unhinged probably about something at the company. In the end, they will make it.  Actually, it uses the universal platform so that would make Armata a failure but it isn't. Contrary, it is the most anticipated weapon to eventually enter service.

    Agreed 100% (and yes, thats kinda what I was alluding too regarding so-called "bankruptcy"), but what annoys me is that Khlopotov repeats this bovine excrement....
    avatar
    miketheterrible

    Posts : 1117
    Points : 1117
    Join date : 2016-11-06

    Re: Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #2

    Post  miketheterrible on Fri Aug 11, 2017 2:35 pm

    Was the former engineer guy fired?

    T-47

    Posts : 79
    Points : 81
    Join date : 2017-07-17
    Location : Planet Earth

    Re: Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #2

    Post  T-47 on Fri Aug 11, 2017 3:43 pm

    I thought more orders of BMP and BMD are going to improve the situation Neutral Rolling Eyes
    avatar
    miketheterrible

    Posts : 1117
    Points : 1117
    Join date : 2016-11-06

    Re: Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #2

    Post  miketheterrible on Fri Aug 11, 2017 3:59 pm

    They will give it to rostec, the only way to save it.

    They can order infinite amount of BMP's and it won't save the company. Piss poor management for too long. Once its part of an armor holding, it will be fine.

    Sponsored content

    Re: Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #2

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Mon Aug 21, 2017 7:44 pm