Lyle6 claimed that its irrelevant if the 2A72 and 2A42 have APDS or APFSDS rounds because the 100mm HE round is better than them at destroying AFVs. I never doubted its effectiveness against soft or static targets.
The BMP-3 has a range of different weapons each suited to engage different targets... the 30mm cannon with armour piercing rounds is intended for engaging hard targets like light armoured vehicles... the current model has a new fire control system and newer ammunition for all the weapons so the 4km range 100mm HE rounds are replaced with 7km range 100mm HE rounds, the missile is upgraded but it is a laser beam riding missile that is cheaper than most tank fired western rounds. The 30mm rounds are upgraded too with the effective range of the HEI rounds increased from 2.5km to 4km with the ballistic computer and auto target tracking system as part of the fire control system.
Sure he did, because a direct hit with 3UOF19/19 or 9M117 will tear apart any IFV existing.
It would certainly damage optics, but considering the 30mm cannon is there and can be immediately fired I would think it would not be the first choice.
Obviously if the target is a Bradley and that Bradley had just fired a TOW at you then lobbing a 100mm round at them would certainly be a useful response... quickly followed by a move behind cover... the 100mm round would sever the wire guiding the TOW and it should be an easy shot to the 4km range of the TOW wire... not to mention it would shatter the optics as well, but the whole point of carrying 8 guided missiles is to engage enemy IFVs... they are not intended for tanks... if a BMP-3 finds itself engaged with a tank... that means pop smoke and run away.
And that would go double for the Bradley because sitting still for 20 seconds guiding a TOW at a target armed with a 125mm gun firing APFSDS rounds at 1.8km/s while on the move is a recipe for a dead US BMP.
And both 2A42 and 2A72 have both AP-T and APDS-T rounds.
There is nothing more to talk about.
If we look at the replacements with the Epoch turret the Kornets are for shooting at tanks or drones, and the Bulat is for enemy IFVs (8 ready to fire... similar to the 8 missiles the BMP-3 carries)... but the Epoch turret also has a 57mm grenade launcher with an APFSDS round too that should deal with most BMPs... and even tanks from the side and rear.
The 100mm gun has a small range and the gun need to be elevated toward the sky to fire at max range which sucks when trying to be precise.
You can test it in War Thunder.
You do appreciate War Thunder is not real in the sense that the BMP-3 has an auto target tracker and laser range finder and ballistics computer that would generate a point of aim which you would place on the target and then fire with reasonable certainty of a direct hit most of the time.
The ATGM is decent but costly. I rather have a high velocity gun to fire precisly HE rounds than atgm because HE will be better every time unless you are facing a tank for which HEAT is needed.
Actually their missiles are rather cheap laser beam riders that are very affordable and hard to stop.
High velocity for HE is a problem... the amount of propellent needed to get HE which is large and bulky (ie not very dense) is enormous which makes the entire round enormous too.
The whole idea behind telescopic cased ammo is that HE you want most of the volume or available space to be bomb because a heavier HE round is a more effective round and the velocity it arrives at is meaningless... a 57mm HE shell arriving at 1,000m/s wont do much to an Abrams, but a 250kg IED that is stationary and the Abrams rolls over it would be devastating. With APFSDS rounds it is length and speed.
Their 57mm grenade round is a perfect example where the HE bomb is most of the case length is HE projectile with a small stub propellent case to deliver it to the target. The APFSDS round has a shell case the full length of the round but the projectile is a very long narrow dart with a sabot at the nose and filled with enormous amounts of propellent that results in a bigger heavier and longer metal dart and more propellent than you could fit in three 30 x 165mm cannon shell cases... meaning it will be much more effective against heavier armour.
You can test it in War Thunder.
That was the original BMP-3... it had the old laser range finder box on the main gun and used the old 4km range 100mm rounds so of course they will be lofted.... and they still seemed to go on target by the way.
The newer ammo is higher pressure and rather more powerful projectiles that have a much larger lethal zone for troops in the open.
When facing any type of armoured vehicle that isn't a light armoured vehicle you use HEAT warheads... and if it is at range and moving then a guided missile is always better than the most accurate gun.
So a low velocity HE howitzer is just fine for destroying vehicles. clown Laughing Notice how none of you adressed accuracy issues. Its idiotic that youre pretending that a 360m/s shell is accurate at long ranges(800m+) against AFVs.
The 100mm gun with HE rounds was never intended for shooting at armoured vehicles, that is why 8 guided missiles are carried and the armour piercing 30mm cannon shells are carried.
An ATGM is far too valuable to be used on an IFV.
The ATGMs are carried specifically for use against IFVs... that is their purpose... the BMP-3 is not intended to go up against enemy tanks.
Hell, why doesnt the Russian army simply stop producing APFSDS rounds for any cannon since they can rely on HE and gun launched ATGMs? Why do they even have any high velocity cannon on tanks and IFVs when HE and ATGMs are just so sufficient? 360m/s is absolutely enough, right?
360m/s is for the old 4km range ammo. The BMP-3 can load a HE round in 3 seconds but can also load a missile in 6 seconds, which means if the enemy target is within 2km it can fire its 30mm cannon, but if the enemy vehicle is more than 5.5km away the only weapon it can use is a HE round, but fortunately the target likely would not have any weapons that could engage the BMP-3 from that range either.
Its ridiculous how me mentioning a limit of capability of the 2A70 triggers you so much that you started pretending like its some anti-everything miracle weapon(not counting ATGMs, since they dont need to be fired from the 2A70, and quadpacked kornets are more effective anyway).
It is actually a very capable and useful and versatile weapon, but as enemy armour on their BMPs are getting to thick for even 30 x165mm APFSDS then they needed to upgrade and using HEAT rounds for their 100mm gun is an option, the solution they seem to be going for is a 57mm grenade launcher able to fire much more powerful APFSDS rounds than could be loaded into a 30mm shell case.
It seems like the engineers behind the BMP-2 were idots. They shouldve just put a bigger low velocity cannon on a BMP-1.
Actually the BMP-2 was used together with BMPs because their different weapons tended to compliment each other.
Some targets a 30mm cannon was best for, but sometimes a heavier HE round was required leading to the BMP remaining in service long after it should have been replaced by the BMP-2. The BMP-3 reflected that HE fire power and auto cannon fire power are different and complimentary.
They did that but it didnt win the competion. I guess the soviet army was full of idiots then, since they wanted an autocannon with anti-armor capabilities.
The 73mm gun of the BMP was required because the AT-3 ATGM couldn't hit targets within 300m so it needed a main gun that could deal with enemy armour including MBTs out to about 800m... for which the 73mm gun was excellent.
When the BMP-2 was being developed the AT-4 and AT-5 missiles had minimum ranges of about 25m so it didn't need a main gun with the ability to defeat heavy armour.
It really seems like you both have been playing too much war thunder where you shoot 90% at the time at less than 300m, that you dont care about long range accuracy at all, as well as believing HE rounds are very powerful because the game models HE in a retarded way.
The fire control systems on these vehicles are not accurately modelled so a shot at extreme ranges would still be very accurate, but obviously at more than 2km range against modern enemy BMPs a missile would be required simply for the penetration that the 30mm rounds would lack at that distance.
Modern NATO IFVs like the lynx, KF-41, CV90 have far more RHA protection than that. This isnt 1980 where NATO has thin skinned AFVs. For the 30mm gun to stay relevant, UBR-11 rounds must be produced in large quantities.
HATO heavy BMPs will be engaged with missiles from a BMP-3 and a BMP-2 and upgraded BMPs. For new generation turrets that would be 57mm grenade launchers with APFSDS rounds and Bulat missiles.
The 2A70 is a very effective weapon for antinfantry tasks and it allows ATGMs to be hidden in the hull, but 30mm APFSDS rounds are still needed for destroying everything short of a tank in a cost-effective way.
True, but when the APFSDS from the 30mm cannon is most effective is within 1.5km, so using the missiles is actually safer.
IMO an autoloaded 85-76mm gun firing at 12-40 rpm would be highly effective on an AFV the size of a T-15.
Such rounds would be enormous so you would get less than 2 minutes worth of firing before needing to reload.
85-76mm is in the middle ground... not as much HE as the 100mm gun but taking up rather more space than a 57mm grenade launcher that has a HE round the size and power of an 85-76mm round.
Its big enough for powerful air busting HE rounds, small enough for very rapid fire, capable of firing powerful gun launched top attack ATGMs, and has the capability of firing devastating APFSDS with much larger range than the 57mm or 30mm APFSDS.
If its rate of fire is high then why would each round need to be powerful?
The 57mm grenade launcher already has an excellent APFSDS round.
It would also be compact enough so there would be room for infantry inside the IFV.
No.... that is the point.... making it powerful and increasing the calibre means it wont be compact at all.
The 73mm gun on the BMP was simply a recoilless rifle with the rear end closed off... it is essentially an SPG-9 but needing less propellent because it is a gun launcher rather than an open tube launcher... it looks like a super RPG-7 rocket.
The 100mm gun of the BMP-3 was specifically designed the 100mm round is almost all projectile with a tiny stub shell... it is an incredibly efficient and effective way of delivering HE to a target.
It is not ideal for destroying enemy armour but lets be clear there are very different types of armour...
There are APCs and light vehicles not intended for anything but stopping small arms fire and artillery fragments... even HMGs will penetrate... this is the sort of vehicle a 100mm HE round is devastating against... unarmoured humvees and Strykers and MRAPs the like.
The heavier BMP type vehicles intended for near front line combat would be safe from HE rounds from most sources though even a direct hit from a 240mm mortar can ruin any day.
The BMP-3 carried missiles and APFSDS rounds to deal with heavier enemy armour that does not include tanks because it would run away from tanks... if it was meant to fight tanks then it would have 8.5km range Kornet missiles instead of 5.5km range Arkan missiles.
Their next gen BMPs will have a 57mm grenade launcher with a bomb that is not as powerful as the 100mm guns bomb, but might have a similar max range of about 6km. The 57mm grenade is enormous and there is an APFSDS version that used the large volume of the HE round for a small calibre rather long APFSDS penetrator dart and lots of propellent to make it go much faster than the 30x165mm case of the 2A42 or 2A72 cannons can manage... and if that fails then it will have four Kornet missiles and 8 Bulat missiles ready to go... especially if the target is moving and at long range.
2A70 of the early models has some 20m of CEP at the maximal 4000m shooting distance,
And the laser range finder and laser beam for the beam riding missile mounted on top of the cannon barrel clearly shows a very early BMP-3 model.