I think we slowly come together regarding BMPT although I think you are not quite understanding my angle of view.
I think half the problem is that the Russian Army and UVZ have not really clearly and precisely explained what this vehicle will be used for...
In "Russias' Arms 2004" its designation... ie BMPT, is translated as Tank Support Combat Vehicle.
The description says:
Intended to enhance combat effectiveness of tank units and decrease their losses by neutralising and defeating the enemy anti armour capable weapons, particularly its close combat assets, as well as by repelling attacks by its helicopters and low flying aircraft.
In addition, the combat vehicle can be successfully used in the composition of combat and march security elements, including peacekeeping and anti terrorist operations.
... it then goes on to describe how it carries lots of ammo for combat persistence.
Seems to me its focus is anti ambush fire power with the ability to engage targets that tanks can't reach. It is intended to operate with tank forces and on its own as convoy security.
I agree, BMPT is totally new concept and everyone have different idea, what roles it could do and what weaponry it could carry. The current armament it have is a compromise and I still think it is good one or at least a good base to discus about changes.
I think if its focus was close range fire power then the 2A42 is a poor choice. It can fire single shots and in two burst modes... low and high. In the low rate it fires between 200 and 300 rpm and in the high rate mode it fires about 500 rpm.
The coaxial 30mm gun on the BMP-3 is the 2A72 which fires at 330 rpm which is probably too low for aerial targets but is ideal for most ground targets as the low rate of fire would improve accuracy.
If fire power is the goal then the twin barrel 2A38M could be the solution, with burst length control to ensure ammo isn't wasted on ground targets.
This could be a reason, they decide to have ATGMs in that configuration. I also don't see a problem with replacing two 2A42 guns with 2A38 gun with a little lower rate of fire around 1000 - 1500 rounds/min.
The GSh-30K is based on the GSh-30.
The GSh-30 is fitted to the Su-25 and is the gun that the 2A38M is based on too.
The GSh-30 has a rate of fire of between 3,000 and 3,500 rpm, while the GSh-30K has longer barrels and is fitted to some Hind models in a fixed position on the side of the aircraft and has the lower rate of fire of 2,000-2,600rpm in the high rate of fire setting and 300-400 rpm in the low rate of fire setting.
This would make the GSh-30K ideal for use in a fire power vehicle used against both ground and air targets.
Considering it is created to replace AA guns in ground battlefield, than we have to consider, that BMPT's main armament are two 2A42 guns. ATGMs and grenade launchers are for self defense, if BMPT come in troubles.
But that is just the point... the threats to the BMPT are things that can destroy targets with tank level armour... and the purpose of the BMPT is to operate with tanks to protect them from threats that can destroy tanks...
Some guy pops out from behind a bush with an AK... a tank can deal with that. A guy on the top of a 10 level building with an RPG on the other hand the tank only has a roof mounted HMG with 300 rounds.
New Russian tanks will have excellent optics and visibility, what they lack is the ability to aim at some target types. BMPs could hit such targets, but they are to weakly armoured to go everywhere tanks go.
The BMPT is to support tanks and protect them from things tanks are not good at dealing with.
Tanks can deal with tanks and other armoured targets even at extended ranges. The main purpose of the ATAKAs seems to me to be to give some anti aircraft capability and the ability to hit point targets at different ranges with HE.
In terms of a fire support vehicle for a patrol on an anti terrorist operation I would think my suggestion of three 40mm grenade launchers in three turrets with three 7.62mm MGs and also a 100mm gun and 30mm cannon offers plenty of fire power potential.
I don't see any trouble with replacing ATAKA ATGMs with 2A70 100 mm gun. Maybe constructors have problems to create autoloader for 2A70 in outside configuration.
The relatively short stubby round used by the gun comes in HE FRAG only, so rather than an automated ammo stowage around the turret ring a different ammo handling arrangement perhaps using a belt feed system from a bustle position ammo storage bin.
There was talk of the T-95 having a 30mm cannon in an external mount... and to be honest if Armata has a rear turret mounted 30mm gun with 400-500 rounds that elevates independently from the main gun up to a reasonable angle you could probably argue that a BMPT type vehicle is no longer needed.
Maybe constructors decide for this configuration, because they think if you have a jam in one gun, you could still fire with second one.
Modern guns are rather reliable and if a round fails to fire most Russian guns have special charges that are built in to the guns design with a shaped charge that blows a hole in the side of the cartridge wall and ignites the powder in a round that fails to fire to fire it and clear the round from the gun. These special charges are called squibs and most guns carry 5-6 squibs per gun that can be reloaded when the gun is reloaded.
It is not tank hunter, they have Kornet and Khrizantema for that role. It is not AD system, they have Tunguska, Tor and Pantsir for that role. It is also not replacing BMPs with infantry, they still stay there in formation.
It is to operate with tanks as its primary role, so it doesn't need to engage tanks, and the air defence unit attached to the tank unit will deal with air based threats.
I don't agree regarding the BMP... a BTR is for troop transport with minor fire support capability for the troops transported. For the BMP this fire support role is increased to become part of its primary function. In heavy brigades the troop transport vehicles will not have the space for BMP level fire power AND troops, so because they are primarily troop transports they will lose most of their fire power. This will greatly reduce the fire power of a tank and motor infantry unit... in fact more so the motor infantry unit as it has more troop transports and so loses more fire power than the tank units lose.
The solution is a tank based fire support vehicle needed in the Heavy Brigades only.
The medium brigades might get away with firepower and troops... or they might just produce wheeled and tracked APCs and fire support vehicles with one vehicle having reduced armament with a normal squad of toops, and the other of the same type with no troops, heavy fire power and an extra load of ammo with a separation between the crew and ammo for safety.
In the light brigades fire power and mobility will be key so troop transports with no toops but full of heavy weapons is a given.
BTW I don't think we disagree too much on this... for a while I thought the armament made sense too, but if you think about the future team of vehicles compared with what they have now the problem becomes clear... right now they could have T-90AM as tank, BMP-3M as troop transport. From a 125mm main gun, plus 7.62mm coaxial and remote control roof mounted MGs they can deal with a range of hard targets and aircraft (with tube fired missiles), plus a 30mm cannon, plus 100mm gun firing HE shells to 7km and missiles to 6km or so, plus MGs and grenade launchers it has plenty of fire power to engage a range of targets.
These are going to be replaced by Armata with probably the same or similar armament as the T-90, and the BTRT probably with an external remote control 12.7mm HMG, or 7.62mm MG and or 30mm or 40mm grenade launcher or some combination... and that is it. BMPT adds a 30mm cannon and ATAKA missiles, but the ATAKAs don't really do anything the 125mm tube launched missiles can't do. The 30mm cannons will elevate higher than the 125mm main gun and they provide punch but there is no powerful indirect fire capability and after 4 missile launches the vehicles ability to take out a whole room out to 3-4km with one shot is gone.
The fragmentation from a 100mm shell is much more effective than the fragmentation from 30mm cannon shells or 30mm or 40mm grenades.