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


+65
PapaDragon
Stealthflanker
Vann7
Strizh
Khepesh
Bolt
k@llashniKoff
cheesfactory
alexZam
AbsoluteZero
EKS
Acheron
KoTeMoRe
smerch24
xeno
Rmf
victor1985
2SPOOKY4U
Brovich
cracker
mack8
Cpt Caz
OminousSpudd
Dima
ult
akd
chicken
Big_Gazza
GarryB
mutantsushi
fragmachine
RTN
NickM
Mike E
sweetflowers365
calripson
Asf
Vympel
AZZKIKR
runaway
magnumcromagnon
etaepsilonk
Morpheus Eberhardt
NationalRus
As Sa'iqa
Sujoy
Department Of Defense
Regular
gaurav
AJ-47
AlfaT8
Viktor
Werewolf
collegeboy16
Russian Patriot
flamming_python
Cyberspec
Austin
Mindstorm
KomissarBojanchev
medo
Zivo
George1
TR1
TheArmenian
69 posters

    Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #1

    Dima
    Dima


    Posts : 1216
    Points : 1227
    Join date : 2012-03-22

    Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #1 - Page 25 Empty Re: Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #1

    Post  Dima Tue Mar 24, 2015 5:28 pm

    But I would prefer to see a 57mm variant as well, it will be a good asset in clearing urban areas.
    Werewolf
    Werewolf


    Posts : 5440
    Points : 5637
    Join date : 2012-10-24

    Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #1 - Page 25 Empty Re: Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #1

    Post  Werewolf Wed Mar 25, 2015 12:22 am

    They are probably not finished for serial production yet.
    magnumcromagnon
    magnumcromagnon


    Posts : 8159
    Points : 8304
    Join date : 2013-12-05
    Location : Pindos ave., Pindosville, Pindosylvania, Pindostan

    Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #1 - Page 25 Empty Re: Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #1

    Post  magnumcromagnon Wed Mar 25, 2015 3:28 am

    Speaking about unified chassis', any thought about the Scout-SV? It's way more modest in comparison to the Kurganets-25:

    runaway
    runaway


    Posts : 410
    Points : 423
    Join date : 2010-11-12
    Location : Sweden

    Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #1 - Page 25 Empty Re: Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #1

    Post  runaway Wed Mar 25, 2015 7:38 am

    The turret is way back to the rear, unlike the most IFV´s, and i wonder how it will not be in the way for the rear passenger area? As they enter and exit from rear, a turret will take up the most space, hence no passenger area there, but forward of turret?

    Strange...

    TR1
    TR1


    Posts : 5536
    Points : 5542
    Join date : 2011-12-06

    Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #1 - Page 25 Empty Re: Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #1

    Post  TR1 Wed Mar 25, 2015 7:42 am

    The "Epoha-lite" turret expected to be on the Kurganets (at least for now) does not penetrate the hull deeply at all. Ammo is all within the unit.
    runaway
    runaway


    Posts : 410
    Points : 423
    Join date : 2010-11-12
    Location : Sweden

    Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #1 - Page 25 Empty Re: Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #1

    Post  runaway Wed Mar 25, 2015 7:52 am

    TR1 wrote:The "Epoha-lite" turret expected to be on the Kurganets (at least for now) does not penetrate the hull deeply at all. Ammo is all within the unit.

    Alright, the turret is remote and the crew is forward of turret, that makes sense. But then i wonder whats the point with the turret way back rear?

    TR1
    TR1


    Posts : 5536
    Points : 5542
    Join date : 2011-12-06

    Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #1 - Page 25 Empty Re: Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #1

    Post  TR1 Wed Mar 25, 2015 8:03 am

    runaway wrote:
    TR1 wrote:The "Epoha-lite" turret expected to be on the Kurganets (at least for now) does not penetrate the hull deeply at all. Ammo is all within the unit.

    Alright, the turret is remote and the crew is forward of turret, that makes sense. But then i wonder whats the point with the turret way back rear?


    Probably to balance engine weight in front, as well as allow for the vehicle crew to have hatch access + un-obscured vision devices.

    runaway
    runaway


    Posts : 410
    Points : 423
    Join date : 2010-11-12
    Location : Sweden

    Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #1 - Page 25 Empty Re: Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #1

    Post  runaway Wed Mar 25, 2015 8:14 am

    TR1 wrote:
    runaway wrote:
    TR1 wrote:The "Epoha-lite" turret expected to be on the Kurganets (at least for now) does not penetrate the hull deeply at all. Ammo is all within the unit.

    Alright, the turret is remote and the crew is forward of turret, that makes sense. But then i wonder whats the point with the turret way back rear?


    Probably to balance engine weight in front, as well as allow for the vehicle crew to have hatch access + un-obscured vision devices.


    Hm, hatch access is likely, but with both turret rear and passenger of 8 per 100kg soldiers + 300-400kg equipment, i suspect it would be rear heavy. The BMP is balanced and there is engine at front, turret in middle.
    I am sure the Kurgantes is well balanced, its just a very different solution then what we are used too!

    TR1
    TR1


    Posts : 5536
    Points : 5542
    Join date : 2011-12-06

    Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #1 - Page 25 Empty Re: Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #1

    Post  TR1 Wed Mar 25, 2015 8:20 am

    Well I hope the balance comes from the frontal arc being heavily armored enough.

    Rounds like these:
    http://www.cta-international.com/apfsds-t-d-8.html

    Are only going to become more and more common.
    Werewolf
    Werewolf


    Posts : 5440
    Points : 5637
    Join date : 2012-10-24

    Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #1 - Page 25 Empty Re: Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #1

    Post  Werewolf Wed Mar 25, 2015 12:18 pm

    TR1 wrote:Well I hope the balance comes from the frontal arc being heavily armored enough.

    Rounds like these:
    http://www.cta-international.com/apfsds-t-d-8.html

    Are only going to become more and more common.

    Hard to achieve 140mm protection against KE with weight limitation and amphibious requirement.
    medo
    medo


    Posts : 4361
    Points : 4443
    Join date : 2010-10-24
    Location : Slovenia

    Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #1 - Page 25 Empty Re: Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #1

    Post  medo Wed Mar 25, 2015 4:30 pm

    Any pictures of Boomerang till now?
    TR1
    TR1


    Posts : 5536
    Points : 5542
    Join date : 2011-12-06

    Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #1 - Page 25 Empty Re: Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #1

    Post  TR1 Wed Mar 25, 2015 8:22 pm

    Werewolf wrote:
    TR1 wrote:Well I hope the balance comes from the frontal arc being heavily armored enough.

    Rounds like these:
    http://www.cta-international.com/apfsds-t-d-8.html

    Are only going to become more and more common.

    Hard to achieve 140mm protection against KE with weight limitation and amphibious requirement.

    Could be done I think. BMP-3 frontal plate is pretty thick on its own:

    http://btvt.narod.ru/raznoe/vbtt_1991_bmp31.htm

    Kurganets has an extra 7 tons at the very least to play with. Plus, more advanced materials, weight saving in other areas (turret alone is a big weight cutter), and advanced ERA/NERA/applique armor/whatever they go for.
    Werewolf
    Werewolf


    Posts : 5440
    Points : 5637
    Join date : 2012-10-24

    Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #1 - Page 25 Empty Re: Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #1

    Post  Werewolf Wed Mar 25, 2015 8:51 pm

    TR1 wrote:
    Werewolf wrote:
    TR1 wrote:Well I hope the balance comes from the frontal arc being heavily armored enough.

    Rounds like these:
    http://www.cta-international.com/apfsds-t-d-8.html

    Are only going to become more and more common.

    Hard to achieve 140mm protection against KE with weight limitation and amphibious requirement.

    Could be done I think. BMP-3 frontal plate is pretty thick on its own:

    http://btvt.narod.ru/raznoe/vbtt_1991_bmp31.htm

    Kurganets has an extra 7 tons at the very least to play with. Plus, more advanced materials, weight saving in other areas (turret alone is a big weight cutter), and advanced ERA/NERA/applique armor/whatever they go for.

    Well the ERA on BMP-2/3 that was specially designed withstands 30x165mm AP-I rounds eve from the side without detonating, there are two or three armor plates within that provide front and side protection against 30 API rounds, while without it they pierce both sides like paper.
    TR1
    TR1


    Posts : 5536
    Points : 5542
    Join date : 2011-12-06

    Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #1 - Page 25 Empty Re: Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #1

    Post  TR1 Wed Mar 25, 2015 9:00 pm

    If I read another time how this shows a Russian turn to "Western solutions" I will shoot someone.

    WTF is 'Western' about modern technical solutions that everyone came to? Not all "Western" IFVs even use the same solutions.

    BMP-1 laid out the modern IFV formula, it has been improved on by everyone since. That's it.

    Applique armor is not a reflection that older Russian solutions were wrong. Christ, no one back then even used applique armor.

    In fact, what huge revolutionary breakthrough is the Kurganets from the BMP-2? It is across a board a modern BMP-2 equivalent, adjusted for 2015 advances.
    Mike E
    Mike E


    Posts : 2640
    Points : 2676
    Join date : 2014-06-19
    Location : Bay Area, CA

    Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #1 - Page 25 Empty Re: Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #1

    Post  Mike E Wed Mar 25, 2015 9:34 pm

    TR1 wrote:If I read another time how this shows a Russian turn to "Western solutions" I will shoot someone.

    WTF is 'Western' about modern technical solutions that everyone came to? Not all "Western" IFVs even use the same solutions.

    BMP-1 laid out the modern IFV formula, it has been improved on by everyone since. That's it.

    Applique armor is not a reflection that older Russian solutions were wrong. Christ, no one back then even used applique armor.

    In fact, what huge revolutionary breakthrough is the Kurganets from the BMP-2? It is across a board a modern BMP-2 equivalent, adjusted for 2015 advances.
    How relevant... An idiot and I on Engadget are spewing it out over how Kurganets is a "copy of the Bradley". I  lol1 'd to hard.
    flamming_python
    flamming_python


    Posts : 6743
    Points : 6821
    Join date : 2012-01-30

    Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #1 - Page 25 Empty Re: Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #1

    Post  flamming_python Wed Mar 25, 2015 9:38 pm

    Don't recall any Bradley ATGM vehicles, Bradley air-defence vehicles, Bradley MBTs, Bradley-based recovery vehicles, Bradley command vehicles, Bradley bridge-layers, Bradley EW vehicles, Bradley self-propelled artillery, Bradley mortar-support vehicles, Bradley MLRSs..

    Seriously - how can you compare it to an IFV? It's not an IFV - it's a chassis.


    Last edited by flamming_python on Wed Mar 25, 2015 9:43 pm; edited 1 time in total
    TR1
    TR1


    Posts : 5536
    Points : 5542
    Join date : 2011-12-06

    Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #1 - Page 25 Empty Re: Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #1

    Post  TR1 Wed Mar 25, 2015 9:40 pm

    There actually are Bradley recovery vehicles, the Linebacker AD vehicle (just a stinger box strapped on to the turret lol), and other variants, but your point is taken.

    But really what it comes down to is, if the Kurganets is a Bradley copy, the Bradley is a BMP copy.
    flamming_python
    flamming_python


    Posts : 6743
    Points : 6821
    Join date : 2012-01-30

    Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #1 - Page 25 Empty Re: Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #1

    Post  flamming_python Wed Mar 25, 2015 9:47 pm

    TR1 wrote:There actually are Bradley recovery vehicles, the Linebacker AD vehicle (just a stinger box strapped on to the turret lol), and other variants, but your point is taken.

    But really what it comes down to is, if the Kurganets is a Bradley copy, the Bradley is a BMP copy.

    I simply can't wait until Russia has a whole brigade composed entirely or nearly entirely out of Bradley-Kurganets vehicles study

    Including maybe 3 or so companies of equipped with those teletank-robot vehicles, for recon purposes - no need for a manned Kurganets-based replacement for the BRDM-2, remote-controlled vehicles for the purpose will do fine.
    Mike E
    Mike E


    Posts : 2640
    Points : 2676
    Join date : 2014-06-19
    Location : Bay Area, CA

    Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #1 - Page 25 Empty Re: Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #1

    Post  Mike E Wed Mar 25, 2015 10:06 pm

    flamming_python wrote:
    TR1 wrote:There actually are Bradley recovery vehicles, the Linebacker AD vehicle (just a stinger box strapped on to the turret lol), and other variants, but your point is taken.

    But really what it comes down to is, if the Kurganets is a Bradley copy, the Bradley is a BMP copy.

    I simply can't wait until Russia has a whole brigade composed entirely or nearly entirely out of Bradley-Kurganets vehicles study

    Including maybe 3 or so companies of equipped with those teletank-robot vehicles, for recon purposes - no need for a manned Kurganets-based replacement for the BRDM-2, remote-controlled vehicles for the purpose will do fine.
    What this guy is doing is for all practical purposes... Denying Russian innovation (because it *doesn't exist* here in the West) and parading it as a copy of what was made years ago. Kinda like how US sites have been comparing the all new Armata design to the 40 year old Abrams, they are in a whole different (superior) league. 

    The Bradley is junk either way, and there's a reason the Army wants it gone so fast. They've been trying for over a decade now with no solution in site. In fact, they are going to remove the very successful M113 chassis and replace it with the far inferior Bradley one under the guise of age... The Bradley is 40 years old... 

    Can't wait as well. This is the future Russian force I've been wanting to see for years. 


    russia
    OminousSpudd
    OminousSpudd


    Posts : 925
    Points : 930
    Join date : 2015-01-03
    Location : New Zealand

    Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #1 - Page 25 Empty Re: Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #1

    Post  OminousSpudd Wed Mar 25, 2015 10:16 pm

    Mike E wrote:
    What this guy is doing is for all practical purposes... Denying Russian innovation (because it *doesn't exist* here in the West) and parading it as a copy of what was made years ago. Kinda like how US sites have been comparing the all new Armata design to the 40 year old Abrams, they are in a whole different (superior) league. 

    The Bradley is junk either way, and there's a reason the Army wants it gone so fast. They've been trying for over a decade now with no solution in site. In fact, they are going to remove the very successful M113 chassis and replace it with the far inferior Bradley one under the guise of age... The Bradley is 40 years old... 

    Can't wait as well. This is the future Russian force I've been wanting to see for years. 


    russia

    Aren't they brilliant though? I mean what I really love about the West is that they believe their own rhetoric when it comes to innovation. In the long run this hampers their military development no end.

    Another demonstration of the West being its own worst enemy, and I think the sweetest part is that they don't even know it.
    Werewolf
    Werewolf


    Posts : 5440
    Points : 5637
    Join date : 2012-10-24

    Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #1 - Page 25 Empty Re: Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #1

    Post  Werewolf Wed Mar 25, 2015 11:28 pm

    I find it completley hilarious when some US/NATO fanboys say, russia should adopt western standards for tanks...like any western country has made any standards on tanks it were constantly russians that invented tank technologies, even the entire IVF is russian concept.
    Big_Gazza
    Big_Gazza


    Posts : 3433
    Points : 3431
    Join date : 2014-08-25
    Location : Melbourne, Australia

    Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #1 - Page 25 Empty Re: Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #1

    Post  Big_Gazza Thu Mar 26, 2015 12:07 am

    OminousSpudd wrote:
    Mike E wrote:
    What this guy is doing is for all practical purposes... Denying Russian innovation (because it *doesn't exist* here in the West) and parading it as a copy of what was made years ago. Kinda like how US sites have been comparing the all new Armata design to the 40 year old Abrams, they are in a whole different (superior) league. 

    The Bradley is junk either way, and there's a reason the Army wants it gone so fast. They've been trying for over a decade now with no solution in site. In fact, they are going to remove the very successful M113 chassis and replace it with the far inferior Bradley one under the guise of age... The Bradley is 40 years old... 

    Can't wait as well. This is the future Russian force I've been wanting to see for years. 

    russia

    Aren't they brilliant though? I mean what I really love about the West is that they believe their own rhetoric when it comes to innovation. In the long run this hampers their military development no end.

    Another demonstration of the West being its own worst enemy, and I think the sweetest part is that they don't even know it.

    This is a classic case of an across-the-board unified mindset causing a systemic failure due to the inability of the policy makers to perceive how reality is contradicting their cherished (and self-serving) beliefs. Russia-haters in the US Ruling Elite simply cannot accept that Russians are as clever and creative as they are, and these retrogrades insist in burying their heads in the dirt and dismissing Russian technology advancements as simple "copying".

    This willful ignorance should be considered to be a blessing. Let the Amerikan Regime underestimate Russian capabilities and war-fighting prowess. If push ever comes to shove, they will be in for a NASTY surprise....
    GarryB
    GarryB


    Posts : 33244
    Points : 33758
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #1 - Page 25 Empty Re: Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #1

    Post  GarryB Thu Mar 26, 2015 9:13 am

    There actually are Bradley recovery vehicles, the Linebacker AD vehicle (just a stinger box strapped on to the turret lol), and other variants, but your point is taken.

    And how many different vehicles are based on the original BMP design that predates the Bradley?

    Can't wait until the west catches up with all of the Soviet and Russian innovations in armoured warfare so they can be given the respect they deserve... smoothbore main tank guns, IFVs, autoloaders for tanks...
    avatar
    ult


    Posts : 837
    Points : 877
    Join date : 2015-02-20

    Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #1 - Page 25 Empty Re: Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #1

    Post  ult Thu Mar 26, 2015 10:20 am

    Kurganets-25 next to BMD-4M.

    Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #1 - Page 25 IQdej51
    Cpt Caz
    Cpt Caz


    Posts : 86
    Points : 95
    Join date : 2013-09-08

    Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #1 - Page 25 Empty Re: Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #1

    Post  Cpt Caz Thu Mar 26, 2015 10:46 am

    Nvm, couldn't see the whole photo.  Thanks for the photo, can't wait to see these babies when they're finally unveiled.

    Sponsored content


    Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #1 - Page 25 Empty Re: Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #1

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Thu May 26, 2022 9:59 pm