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

    Werewolf
    Werewolf


    Posts : 5288
    Points : 5487
    Join date : 2012-10-24

    Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #1 - Page 30 Empty Re: Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #1

    Post  Werewolf Wed Apr 15, 2015 6:49 am

    Zivo wrote:
    Werewolf wrote:
    Zivo wrote:Image seeking and SALH, too expensive. It could be used in a top attack profile though.

    The LCS's gun is a only a 57mm Rolling Eyes

    That is freaking expensive like making 9mm rounds made of diamonds. Unbelievable to use such guidance for such small rounds, the guidance seeker alone must account for 90% of the costs per round.

    Is one round going to cost like $50k or something absurd like that?

    Not sure but probably more than you earn in a year.
    Zivo
    Zivo


    Posts : 1488
    Points : 1514
    Join date : 2012-04-13
    Location : U.S.A.

    Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #1 - Page 30 Empty Re: Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #1

    Post  Zivo Wed Apr 15, 2015 7:01 am

    Werewolf wrote:
    Zivo wrote:
    Werewolf wrote:
    Zivo wrote:Image seeking and SALH, too expensive. It could be used in a top attack profile though.

    The LCS's gun is a only a 57mm Rolling Eyes

    That is freaking expensive like making 9mm rounds made of diamonds. Unbelievable to use such guidance for such small rounds, the guidance seeker alone must account for 90% of the costs per round.

    Is one round going to cost like $50k or something absurd like that?

    Not sure but probably more than you earn in a year.

    I don't understand... This round is so the LCS can shoot at speedboats, rafts, and shit on open water. It would be cheaper and just as effective to shoot a few unguided HE rounds at them, it's not like they're going to run out of 57mm rounds anyways FFS. What a waste of money. cry
    Werewolf
    Werewolf


    Posts : 5288
    Points : 5487
    Join date : 2012-10-24

    Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #1 - Page 30 Empty Re: Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #1

    Post  Werewolf Wed Apr 15, 2015 7:06 am

    Zivo wrote:

    I don't understand... This round is so the LCS can shoot at speedboats, rafts, and shit on open water. It would be cheaper and just as effective to shoot a few unguided HE rounds at them, it's not like they're going to run out of 57mm rounds anyways FFS. What a waste of money. cry

    Yes and if those rounds are intended for aircraft targets that would be a big mistake since with 16km range on a ship that would mean they let enemy aircrafts come far to close to them without using Anti Aircraft Missiles of far higher speed and accuracy not to mention lethality. Those rounds with such guidance don't make to much sense, anything that is on water or in air when it comes so close would be already in weapon engagement range of even a small torpedo/patrol boat, a barage of HE-shells is not only dozen times less cost intensive but also much better to keep the budget for things they actually need to improve. Hell even a 120mm HE round would most probably cost less than one 57mm IIR seeking round and by far more effective.
    Zivo
    Zivo


    Posts : 1488
    Points : 1514
    Join date : 2012-04-13
    Location : U.S.A.

    Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #1 - Page 30 Empty Re: Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #1

    Post  Zivo Wed Apr 15, 2015 7:20 am

    Werewolf wrote:
    Zivo wrote:

    I don't understand... This round is so the LCS can shoot at speedboats, rafts, and shit on open water. It would be cheaper and just as effective to shoot a few unguided HE rounds at them, it's not like they're going to run out of 57mm rounds anyways FFS. What a waste of money. cry

    Yes and if those rounds are intended for aircraft targets that would be a big mistake since with 16km range on a ship that would mean they let enemy aircrafts come far to close to them without using Anti Aircraft Missiles of far higher speed and accuracy not to mention lethality. Those rounds with such guidance don't make to much sense, anything that is on water or in air when it comes so close would be already in weapon engagement range of even a small torpedo/patrol boat, a barage of HE-shells is not only dozen times less cost intensive but also much better to keep the budget for things they actually need to improve. Hell even a 120mm HE round would most probably cost less than one 57mm IIR seeking round and by far more effective.

    Hopefully this never leaves the design stage. The LCS is already plagued with BS. Instead of giving it a real gun, they're trying to bandage its pitiful 57mm with this.
    TR1
    TR1


    Posts : 5552
    Points : 5560
    Join date : 2011-12-06

    Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #1 - Page 30 Empty Re: Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #1

    Post  TR1 Wed Apr 15, 2015 8:50 am

    Much like project 22160 is being shafted with the 57mm because Buerevstnik is desperately pushing it on the MOD.
    GarryB
    GarryB


    Posts : 31568
    Points : 32098
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #1 - Page 30 Empty Re: Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #1

    Post  GarryB Wed Apr 15, 2015 1:37 pm

    I wonder if it would be possible to just cut a hole in Kurganet's roof and drop in the Armata MBT turret?

    Sensors, weapons, and equipment should be standardised... the Epocha turret will largely be the same between the platforms, so I don't see why the MBT and other turrets wouldn't be the same too.

    That would be far to heavy for a plattform that "only" weight is 25+ tons the turret will wait around 9t i assume that would be 36% of the weight, i assume they will make it as thin and as flat as possible without wasting to much weight on it to sustain its 25-30t of weight it still has to be amphibic.

    I suspect the smaller turrets might be the same, though the larger heavier turrets might be scaled for the different platforms... I rather doubt the Typhoon will have the same gun and ammo capacity as the Armata turret for the MBT.

    Image seeking and SALH, too expensive. It could be used in a top attack profile though.

    Iskander uses image seeking... and Ugroza and Sokol-1 uses image seeking with moving target detection and secondary laser marked target tracking.

    In theory a standard CCD chip from a video camera could be used, but a QWIP based chip using thermal imager frequencies could be used to give all weather capability...

    The LCS's gun is a only a 57mm

    If you look at Russian ships the Soviet equivalent from the 80s would have had a 76.2mm gun, while today a lightweight 100mm gun would be used with vastly more powerful and longer range shells.

    In an urban area, saturation and suppression is king, smart shells will not help you.

    All smart shells would be totally wasteful, but having a few guided rounds would be useful for the odd target.

    That is freaking expensive like making 9mm rounds made of diamonds. Unbelievable to use such guidance for such small rounds, the guidance seeker alone must account for 90% of the costs per round.

    A bit like AESA radars... to begin with it will be expensive but capable... but later on as they are produced in large numbers the cost will fall... like CCD chips in digital cameras have become so cheap a tablet might have 2 or 3 cameras...

    Smart shells is just one more option that the commander can use.

    Exactly.... just like gun tube launched missiles... a helo at 7km range is safe from most tank gun rounds but a tank gun launched missile can take it down, whereas a Bradley IFV appears from cover 2km away a single APFSDS round might be the better choice...

    Flexibility... for the commander to decide.

    To do what? Get himself killed? Waste money? Lose through attrition of resources?

    In urban combat, smart shells wont even have time to maneuver.

    Not all urban combat is point blank range... sometimes targets in the distance can be a problem too... like an ATGM team or even helo.

    Good to have as a waste of space, launched missiles would be far more effective, a quad pack of Kornets mounted left and right of the turret would take care of tanks, IFVs, APCs, low flying aircraft, and regular good old HE and HEAT/APFSDS and maybe HE-FRAG would take care of the rest.

    There is a reason the BMP-3M has a 100mm gun launched missile... and also a reason it comes with a HE FRAG version... being able to pop a 100mm HE round through a window at 5km can be very handy sometimes.

    Much like project 22160 is being shafted with the 57mm because Buerevstnik is desperately pushing it on the MOD.

    57mm is a useful calibre and allows a rather large ammo supply to be carried, but 76.2mm and indeed 100mm calibres offer rather better range and shell weight and the guided rounds are much cheaper...
    flamming_python
    flamming_python


    Posts : 5078
    Points : 5158
    Join date : 2012-01-30

    Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #1 - Page 30 Empty Re: Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #1

    Post  flamming_python Wed Apr 15, 2015 3:54 pm

    TR1 wrote:Much like project 22160 is being shafted with the 57mm because Buerevstnik is desperately pushing it on the MOD.

    As a patrol ship it probably doesn't need anything heavier.
    avatar
    AJ-47


    Posts : 199
    Points : 212
    Join date : 2011-10-05
    Location : USA

    Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #1 - Page 30 Empty Re: Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #1

    Post  AJ-47 Thu Apr 16, 2015 1:49 am

    TR1 wrote:Did you see how big Atom was? It was a freaking barnyard.

    And that turret would have huge under-deck penetration.

    That 57mm module shown recently is just a mockup, not a serious product yet. And once again, that flimsy looking thing would have a big drum inside, right in the middle of the troop compartment.

    Allow me to explain my view on this subject.
    I don’t like the IFV concept; I prefer to separate the IFV’s mission between the APC that will carry the soldiers, and the FSV that will carry big gun and will do the fighting.

    The mission of the APC is to move squad of soldiers from point “A” to point “B” without much of fighting, for that the APC doesn't need the 30mm gun, a better gun will be the GSh-23 that has high rate of fire to suppress the enemy's fire on the target, and also support the soldiers on there dismount fighting.

    The “bad guy” that will do most of the fighting will be the FSV. This vehicle will use the T-15’s chassis, will have a crew of 3-4 soldiers and will not carry dismount soldiers.
    The soldiers will be carried only by the APCs.

    On the chassis we will install the AU-220 turret, with 57mm gun, with 20 rounds magazine unit, and with its reloading system. We saw this turret on the Atom vehicle, but as we don't have dismount soldiers, the turret can penetrate the hall, and make the FSV much lower than the Atom which is 3 meters high.

    The 57 mm gun has ROF of 120 spm, effective range of 6 km, and maximum range 12 km, or 16 km with the naval version. The gun has smart ammo with laser guided shells.
    On the turret we will install the 23mm gun that will be operate by the commander or by an extra gunner.
    GarryB
    GarryB


    Posts : 31568
    Points : 32098
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #1 - Page 30 Empty Re: Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #1

    Post  GarryB Fri Apr 17, 2015 3:24 pm

    The 57 mm gun has ROF of 120 spm, effective range of 6 km, and maximum range 12 km, or 16 km with the naval version. The gun has smart ammo with laser guided shells.

    The 6km range is for conventional HE shells that are unguided, and is effective range.

    Effective range for guided shells against air and ground targets would likely be the same 16km range as the naval version as they will use the same ammo and gun barrel.

    According to the videos I have seen the naval 57mm has a firing rate of 300 rpm.

    The combination of a 57mm gun and a twin barrel 23mm cannon is interesting... the former has range and power, while the latter is rather more effective than a heavy machine gun as HE rounds are more effective in cannon calibres while the ammo is not that much bigger than HMG ammo so it can be carried in large numbers. The vehicle would still need some sort of anti tank capability so I would add 4-6 ready to fire Kornet-EM missiles... the problem is that a 120mm gun/mortar would fire even more effective HE rounds with ammo surprisingly not that much bigger than the 57mm shells... instead of maybe 120 rounds on board it would have perhaps 60 rounds... but those rounds would be effective to quite a distance with much more powerful HE capacity.
    avatar
    AJ-47


    Posts : 199
    Points : 212
    Join date : 2011-10-05
    Location : USA

    Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #1 - Page 30 Empty Re: Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #1

    Post  AJ-47 Sat Apr 18, 2015 4:58 am

    GarryB wrote:
    The 57 mm gun has ROF of 120 spm, effective range of 6 km, and maximum range 12 km, or 16 km with the naval version. The gun has smart ammo with laser guided shells.

    The 6km range is for conventional HE shells that are unguided, and is effective range.
    Effective range for guided shells against air and ground targets would likely be the same 16km range as the naval version as they will use the same ammo and gun barrel.
    According to the videos I have seen the naval 57mm has a firing rate of 300 rpm.

    I think the prime object of the 57mm guided shells on the American LCS is to counter the Iranian’s swarm speed boats that give a big headache to the American Navy.
    They are trying to fight those boats by laser and by missiles like the Hellfire, with vertical launch, and the Griffin, that his ER version has a range of 15 km.
    The 57mm Navel gun, with his long range, high RoF and “fire and forget” capability, is another good answer to do the problem.
    BTW, the first 32 LCS will look the same as we know, but from number 33 to 52 they will get upgrade and will look like a frigate. The name of the upgrade LCS is SSC.

    The combination of a 57mm gun and a twin barrel 23mm cannon is interesting... the former has range and power, while the latter is rather more effective than a heavy machine gun as HE rounds are more effective in cannon calibres while the ammo is not that much bigger than HMG ammo so it can be carried in large numbers.
    The vehicle would still need some sort of anti tank capability so I would add 4-6 ready to fire Kornet-EM missiles...

    That’s true, but as on one side of the turret we have the 23mm gun, we can install only 2 missiles on his other side, but we can keep more missiles in the hall as no dismount soldiers will be there.

    the problem is that a 120mm gun/mortar would fire even more effective HE rounds with ammo surprisingly not that much bigger than the 57mm shells... instead of maybe 120 rounds on board it would have perhaps 60 rounds... but those rounds would be effective to quite a distance with much more powerful HE capacity.

    For that we will install, on the Armata’s chassis, a turret like the one on the 2S1 122mm SPH. This vehicle with the FSV will have suppressive firepower that will destroy, the enemy front line, and allow the APCs with the soldiers, to take the enemy post.
    avatar
    mutantsushi


    Posts : 283
    Points : 305
    Join date : 2013-12-11

    Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #1 - Page 30 Empty Re: Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #1

    Post  mutantsushi Sat Apr 18, 2015 6:41 am

    GarryB wrote:The combination of a 57mm gun and a twin barrel 23mm cannon is interesting... the former has range and power, while the latter is rather more effective than a heavy machine gun as HE rounds are more effective in cannon calibres while the ammo is not that much bigger than HMG ammo so it can be carried in large numbers. The vehicle would still need some sort of anti tank capability so I would add 4-6 ready to fire Kornet-EM missiles... the problem is that a 120mm gun/mortar would fire even more effective HE rounds with ammo surprisingly not that much bigger than the 57mm shells... instead of maybe 120 rounds on board it would have perhaps 60 rounds... but those rounds would be effective to quite a distance with much more powerful HE capacity.
    I imagine an advantage of 57mm will be vs. enemy AFVs eventually fielding advanced APS, with 57mm (more) able to overwhelm with volleys of ammo. 100/120 low pressure gun/mortars, possibly with GLATGM option, still seems useful, so it will be interesting to see if that will also be fielded in a different model... I would guess that "some" export customer would like that approach even if Russian Army doesn't...
    TR1
    TR1


    Posts : 5552
    Points : 5560
    Join date : 2011-12-06

    Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #1 - Page 30 Empty Re: Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #1

    Post  TR1 Sat Apr 18, 2015 6:45 am

    flamming_python wrote:
    TR1 wrote:Much like project 22160 is being shafted with the 57mm because Buerevstnik is desperately pushing it on the MOD.

    As a patrol ship it probably doesn't need anything heavier.

    It's a patrol ship that is larger than new Russian corvettes.
    Plus as a patrol ship, the main advantages of the 57mm over larger guns (high ROF) are of dubious use...not like its goign to be shooting down any incoming AShMs.
    A larger gun on the other hand has hard characteristics in terms of range and payload that are always useful. As an anti-ship weapon the 100mm ranges out far more effective fire than the 57mm.

    Plus the A-190 is very lightweight for its size and power (has the footprint of a 76mm weapon supposedly)- and most importantly it just got developed and had its problems ironed out.

    Now this 57mm is being forced onto the navy for god knows what reason.
    TR1
    TR1


    Posts : 5552
    Points : 5560
    Join date : 2011-12-06

    Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #1 - Page 30 Empty Re: Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #1

    Post  TR1 Sat Apr 18, 2015 6:56 am

    GarryB wrote:
    57mm is a useful calibre and allows a rather large ammo supply to be carried, but 76.2mm and indeed 100mm calibres offer rather better range and shell weight and the guided rounds are much cheaper...

    The entire navy is using 100mm guns (and larger) it seems, and they went for the 76.2mm caliber for those other large border ships (for the love of god I can't remember the name right now).....and suddenly we have 57mm on the 22160.

    I don't really get it, but then again that ship's planned armament is weird and unclear in general...modular or whatnot.
    GarryB
    GarryB


    Posts : 31568
    Points : 32098
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #1 - Page 30 Empty Re: Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #1

    Post  GarryB Sat Apr 18, 2015 8:37 am

    I think the prime object of the 57mm guided shells on the American LCS is to counter the Iranian’s swarm speed boats that give a big headache to the American Navy.

    Yes, their attempts with a 127mm gun mount were pathetic from memory... of course a decent 30mm cannon and a few 14.5mm HMGs mounted around the place would make more sense in my opinion... even a good 40mm grenade launcher or ATGM would be more cost effective.

    The 57mm Navel gun, with his long range, high RoF and “fire and forget” capability, is another good answer to do the problem.
    BTW, the first 32 LCS will look the same as we know, but from number 33 to 52 they will get upgrade and will look like a frigate. The name of the upgrade LCS is SSC.

    I would think a decent 76.2mm gun would be better with longer range and rather more punch, while being small and light.

    That’s true, but as on one side of the turret we have the 23mm gun, we can install only 2 missiles on his other side, but we can keep more missiles in the hall as no dismount soldiers will be there.

    Who would get out to load them? Perhaps a quad launcher on each side and mount the 57mm and the twin barrel 23mm together like the 100/30mm on the BMP-3... A rear turret mounted 50 cal RWS for the commander with a co mounted 40mm Balkan grenade launcher would round out a very potent armament... Twisted Evil

    For that we will install, on the Armata’s chassis, a turret like the one on the 2S1 122mm SPH. This vehicle with the FSV will have suppressive firepower that will destroy, the enemy front line, and allow the APCs with the soldiers, to take the enemy post.

    A fire support vehicle could be in a new unit what the mortar carrier and the BMP-3s 100mm gun is in current units... direct and indirect heavy HE fire power... it would reduce the need for the MBTs to carry lots of HE shells, which would also make them safer in case of fire.

    I am a little confused will this FSV operate to support infantry or tanks?

    ie a variation of the BMPT could be used to support infantry in situations where there is no enemy armour... where it could support troops against a range of difficult enemy targets including fortified locations, while the standard BMPT can support MBTs in places where infantry can't operate in the open anyway... and it could be used for convoy protection and situations where very high velocity armour piercing ammo is not needed but a big gun is... ie urban combat against an enemy with few or no tanks.

    I imagine an advantage of 57mm will be vs. enemy AFVs eventually fielding advanced APS, with 57mm (more) able to overwhelm with volleys of ammo. 100/120 low pressure gun/mortars, possibly with GLATGM option, still seems useful, so it will be interesting to see if that will also be fielded in a different model... I would guess that "some" export customer would like that approach even if Russian Army doesn't...

    At one stage I was predicting a mix of IFVs with 100mm/30mm and 57mm gun armament options that equate to todays use of 30mm equipped BMP-2 and 100/30mm equipped BMP-3, but looking at the BMPT model of Armata with a 120mm rifled gun/mortar I think it could replace the 100mm gun, so if we add BMPTs and take out the 100/30mm combo armament and keep the 57mm gun specifically for the APFSDS rounds against enemy vehicles to 2km or so, plus the guided HE shells for use against point targets and aircraft and light vehicles and add 23mm cannon rounds based on the 23 x 115mm cartridge they can eliminate the 100mm gun of the BMP-3 and also the 30mm round as if it is only used for HE power and not its penetration then the 23mm is almost as good but much more compact with less recoil with smaller and lighter guns.

    The 2A42 is a powerful and very dust resistant an reliable weapon but it weighs 115kgs which is more than the 6 barrel 23mm GSh-6-23 at 76kgs and 10-12,000 rpm, let alone the twin barrel GSh-23 at 51kgs and 3,500rpm. In comparison the 6-700 rpm or 300 rpm 2A42 has much higher muzzle velocity but against most ground targets that is not important.
    The 23mm round has a heavy HE projectile for its weight and its low muzzle velocity of 715m/s just makes it a more managable weapon to fire.

    Firing short bursts at 2,500 rpm the Tunguska sends a cluster of shells that almost arrive together so it is like a shotgun blast... there is little chance to dodge...

    As seen on this video of a run away Tunguska:




    The entire navy is using 100mm guns (and larger) it seems, and they went for the 76.2mm caliber for those other large border ships (for the love of god I can't remember the name right now).....and suddenly we have 57mm on the 22160.

    I don't really get it, but then again that ship's planned armament is weird and unclear in general...modular or whatnot.

    If it can hit a point target at 12km with a guided shell then it might be a better weapon than Duet and other 30mm weapons... certainly the punch of hitting a target with a 2-3kg shell would be rather more effective, and with guided shells with proximity fuses the chance of a hit are greatly increased without expending a lot of ammo.

    Of course if you can do it with a 57mm shell it should be easier to do with a larger calibre shell too.
    avatar
    AJ-47


    Posts : 199
    Points : 212
    Join date : 2011-10-05
    Location : USA

    Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #1 - Page 30 Empty Re: Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #1

    Post  AJ-47 Sun Apr 19, 2015 6:22 pm

    Garry Wrote:
    "1. Who would get out loading them?
    2. Perhaps a quad launcher on each side and mount the 57mm and the twin barrel 23mm together like the 100/30mm on the BMP-3...
    3. A rear turret mounted 50 cal RWS for the commander with a co mounted 40mm Balkan grenade launcher would round out a very potent armament.

    1. In a second though, I’ll take out the 23mm gun from the turret and install it in RWS and put it on top of the turret, as we saw on the T-64. The advantages of that is the ability of the RWS to cover 360 degrees around the vehicle, and his high elevation that make it very useful in urban fighting especially against RPG’s teams. Add to that the high rate of fire and the explosive power of the ammo, and we get a weapon that should be a must on every fighting vehicles. It also will allow the gunner and the commander to engage different targets at the same time. The ammo will be kept in the turret.

    2. On both side of the turret we need to install some universal adapter that allow us to put there ATGMs, or 40mm AGL, rockets or anything that will fit the mission.
    It's better to keep the 23mm separate from the 57mm gun.

    3. I like the idea about the rear turret, but with 7.62mm instead of the 0.5" and some electronic devise to make sure that the turrets will not shoot on each other.
    For the rear turret I will get one more soldier.


    Garry wrote:
    "A fire support vehicle could be in a new unit with the mortar carrier and the BMP-3s 100mm gun is in current units... direct and indirect heavy HE fire power... it would reduce the need for the MBTs to carry lots of HE shells, which would also make them safer in case of fire."

    The new unit will be the “breaking through unit” that will lead the offensive against the enemy line of defence. In this unit we should have FSV, the mighty TOS, 122mm SPG like the 2S1 Gvozdika, or the 120mm Vane. Don’t know which is better will appreciate your comments on that.

    Garry Wrote:
    "I am a little confused will this FSV operate to support infantry or tanks?"

    I think the BMPT and the FSV are basically the same type of vehicle, and both can fight with tank or infantry. I think the FSV has better firepower than the BMPT fighting in urban area and in open space, the long range of the 57mm gun make it perfect to engage ATGM’s teams, a capability that the BMPTs don’t have. Putting small radar on the FSV, (need to have if you want APS) will give the FSV the ability to locate the launch point of the RPG or ATGM, aim the 57mm/23mm gun to that point, and open fire automatically.
    GarryB
    GarryB


    Posts : 31568
    Points : 32098
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #1 - Page 30 Empty Re: Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #1

    Post  GarryB Mon Apr 20, 2015 11:32 am

    1. In a second though, I’ll take out the 23mm gun from the turret and install it in RWS and put it on top of the turret, as we saw on the T-64. The advantages of that is the ability of the RWS to cover 360 degrees around the vehicle, and his high elevation that make it very useful in urban fighting especially against RPG’s teams. Add to that the high rate of fire and the explosive power of the ammo, and we get a weapon that should be a must on every fighting vehicles. It also will allow the gunner and the commander to engage different targets at the same time. The ammo will be kept in the turret.

    If we consider who is in the tank and their job separation... we have a driver who drives rapidly from cover to cover, we have a commander that is on the look out for both threats and targets, and we have a gunner who shoots at targets.

    With that in mind I think it is best to have the 57mm and 23mm guns joined together, fully stabilised in a high elevation mount for the gunner to use... targets the gunner will engage will either be engaged with a 57mm or 23mm or Kornet-EM. On the other hand the commander might need to fire a short burst at a fleeting target and therefore need a 12.7mm calibre or 40mm grenade... but the commanders job is to look for threats and targets... not to engage in shooting at targets... that would distract him from his proper role... let the gunner shoot at targets... that is his job.

    It's better to keep the 23mm separate from the 57mm gun.

    I disagree... if you are engaging a target you will be firing one or the other but likely not both... if the gunner is concentrating on a target with the 57mm and the commander is fighting off an infantry attack from another direction with the 23mm gun then who is looking out for enemy helicopters or enemy tanks? The Driver?

    3. I like the idea about the rear turret, but with 7.62mm instead of the 0.5" and some electronic devise to make sure that the turrets will not shoot on each other.
    For the rear turret I will get one more soldier.

    I was just thinking of a RWS mounted on the back of the rear of the main turret... not as a separate engine deck mounted turret.

    More something attached to the commanders panoramic sight... so he can at least shoot immediately at what he sees.

    The new unit will be the “breaking through unit” that will lead the offensive against the enemy line of defence. In this unit we should have FSV, the mighty TOS, 122mm SPG like the 2S1 Gvozdika, or the 120mm Vane. Don’t know which is better will appreciate your comments on that.

    Keep in mind the TOS only has a range of about 4.5km and is an engineer vehicle... once it has fired those 30 rockets it becomes the worlds biggest and heaviest harmonica...

    120mm would be useful in the direct fire role but neither 2S3 nor NONA has the armour for the role of breakthrough vehicle... a BMPT with a 120mm main gun and a 23mm gatling could probably do the job as a LSV...

    I think the BMPT and the FSV are basically the same type of vehicle, and both can fight with tank or infantry. I think the FSV has better firepower than the BMPT fighting in urban area and in open space, the long range of the 57mm gun make it perfect to engage ATGM’s teams, a capability that the BMPTs don’t have. Putting small radar on the FSV, (need to have if you want APS) will give the FSV the ability to locate the launch point of the RPG or ATGM, aim the 57mm/23mm gun to that point, and open fire automatically.

    I would say an Armata BMPT with a rifled 120mm main gun and a 23mm 6 barrel gatling and a 40mm grenade launcher or 57mm grenade launcher would have the wood on any IFV even with a 57mm main gun.
    avatar
    xeno


    Posts : 169
    Points : 174
    Join date : 2013-02-04

    Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #1 - Page 30 Empty Re: Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #1

    Post  xeno Mon Apr 20, 2015 12:58 pm

    Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #1 - Page 30 0_9bcb10
    Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #1 - Page 30 0_9bcb11
    Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #1 - Page 30 0_9bcb12

    Beautiful baby...
    avatar
    cracker


    Posts : 232
    Points : 273
    Join date : 2014-09-04

    Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #1 - Page 30 Empty Re: Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #1

    Post  cracker Mon Apr 20, 2015 3:04 pm

    yeah, hope to see it with 57mm later..

    the tarp covered things are parts of the active protection?
    Werewolf
    Werewolf


    Posts : 5288
    Points : 5487
    Join date : 2012-10-24

    Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #1 - Page 30 Empty Re: Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #1

    Post  Werewolf Mon Apr 20, 2015 3:06 pm

    cracker wrote:yeah, hope to see it with 57mm later..

    the tarp covered things are parts of the active protection?

    Yes.
    avatar
    cracker


    Posts : 232
    Points : 273
    Join date : 2014-09-04

    Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #1 - Page 30 Empty Re: Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #1

    Post  cracker Mon Apr 20, 2015 4:40 pm

    I really like this thing.... well done.

    And there are no similar models of the T-14 and 2S35? come on!!!


    What's to be expected armour wise? steel hull, maybe 20-30mm on the sides and 50 on the front? + those huge boxes on the side and a spaced armour panel on the front? I don't like the fact that all turret sensors are fully exposed.... probably only armored vs 7.62AP.

    So, what's your bets on the inner composition of side skirts? Air? layers + air? Era?
    Werewolf
    Werewolf


    Posts : 5288
    Points : 5487
    Join date : 2012-10-24

    Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #1 - Page 30 Empty Re: Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #1

    Post  Werewolf Mon Apr 20, 2015 5:23 pm

    So, what's your bets on the inner composition of side skirts? Air? layers + air? Era?

    I already know it, that is based on the work they did for BMP2/3. They used heavy boxes on BMP2 with several composite armor sheets inside and ERA, those ERA tiles could take 30x165mm API rounds without detonating and the composite armor plates stoped the 30mm API rounds without penetrating side armor of the hull itself, the frontal armor will have spaced armor and steel/aluminium alloy and willl probably see the extention of the shield that is right infront of the hull to improve its protection.
    avatar
    cracker


    Posts : 232
    Points : 273
    Join date : 2014-09-04

    Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #1 - Page 30 Empty Re: Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #1

    Post  cracker Mon Apr 20, 2015 5:45 pm

    I freakin love it.

    question: why a version with "heavy" armament and obvious active defense launchers everywhere, and the other "naked" variant with probably a PKT in the turret?

    Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #1 - Page 30 P-2888

    Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #1 - Page 30 P-2777
    Werewolf
    Werewolf


    Posts : 5288
    Points : 5487
    Join date : 2012-10-24

    Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #1 - Page 30 Empty Re: Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #1

    Post  Werewolf Mon Apr 20, 2015 6:16 pm

    Probably the APC placeholder version instead of IFV.
    avatar
    cracker


    Posts : 232
    Points : 273
    Join date : 2014-09-04

    Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #1 - Page 30 Empty Re: Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #1

    Post  cracker Mon Apr 20, 2015 6:51 pm

    probably makes sense for cost issue.

    platoon of 4 kurganets will be 2 squadron of 2, 1 heavy + 1 light.


    I imagine BMP-3 will be used in recon/shock company of kurganets brigades, much like a light tank.
    avatar
    AJ-47


    Posts : 199
    Points : 212
    Join date : 2011-10-05
    Location : USA

    Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #1 - Page 30 Empty Re: Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #1

    Post  AJ-47 Tue Apr 21, 2015 12:09 am

    GarryB wrote:
    With that in mind I think it is best to have the 57mm and 23mm guns joined together, fully stabilised in a high elevation mount for the gunner to use... targets the gunner will engage will either be engaged with a 57mm or 23mm or Kornet-EM. On the other hand the commander might need to fire a short burst at a fleeting target and therefore need a 12.7mm calibre or 40mm grenade... but the commanders job is to look for threats and targets... not to engage in shooting at targets... that would distract him from his proper role... let the gunner shoot at targets... that is his job.
    I have no problem with keeping the 23mm gun in the turret, but to keep all the weapons together, like in the BMP-3, we will need to have a bigger hole than the one in the BMP-3, that’s will weaken the turret and that’s no good. But if there is a good way to do it, it’s ok with me.

    RWS on the turret is a must and 23mm gun with coaxial 7.62mm MG will be the best option. The RWS will be operated by gunner no’-2.  This way we’ll keep the gunners doing there jobs and the commander doing his job.

    We have to remember that for fighting in urban areas we need to have a lot of firepower and good protection. To increase the firepower, we can put 2 RWS at the back, and on both side of the FSV hall, and every RWS will be equipped with 23mm and 7.62mm guns.

    I see no reason for HMG as we have the 23mm gun; there is no need for anther type of ammo. I like the 40mm, but until one 40 mm round will hit the target; the 23 mm gun will put there 100 rounds.
    So I will stick to the 23mm gun and coaxial 7.62mm MG as the weapons for the RWS.

    Keep in mind the TOS only has a range of about 4.5km and is an engineer vehicle... once it has fired those 30 rockets it becomes the worlds biggest and heaviest harmonica...
    The TOS 1A as 6 km range. It has 2 support vehicles to help it with reloading.

    120mm would be useful in the direct fire role but neither 2S3 nor NONA has the armour for the role of breakthrough vehicle... a BMPT with a 120mm main gun and a 23mm gatling could probably do the job as a LSV...
    No need for this BMPT, we can use the T-14

    Sponsored content


    Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #1 - Page 30 Empty Re: Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #1

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Tue Dec 07, 2021 7:33 am