You will probably find that for quite sometime that Bmp-3 and kurganets will most likely be in operation for years as there will be occasions where the armour threat is low and the need for lighter vehicles is needed this could be due to transportation via air or ship where weight could be a key factor, or transit through areas with weaker bridges etc. A bmp-3 could be cheaper to operate for all we know. I think the weight difference is around 8 ton between the two this will depend on which turret the kurganets is using and could go up.
It might become a situation very much like the stealth fighters... except that there are no plans to completely replace all fighters with stealth fighters, but what are the chances they will design and build new aircraft that don't take stealth into consideration.
You could say right now that stealth is just too expensive to have for all aircraft and in many situations stealth is redundant anyway... and I think that would also apply to the new vehicle types too.
I think eventually the old types will leave service but obviously will be retained in reserve for some time so they are never going to disappear over night.... the new vehicles wont be super cheap, but the logic of their use makes widespread use of them within a unit more sensible, so to compensate perhaps limit the number of units to get the new vehicles to start with, while the other units will get the upgraded vehicles cascading down so in effect all units will be improving.
The other aspect is even if you don't replace all the BMP-3s with B-15 which is the Kurganets BMP, you can upgrade the BMP-3 with the turret the B-15 uses which will be called B-19 and used in units not based on the new vehicle families yet.
But I think where the biggest difference in weight is the BTR-82 where your looking at a 20 ton difference between BTR-82 and bumerang that's quite a difference, especially if transportation by air or ship and fuel used/ range of aircraft, also going over soft ground 20 ton would make a difference as well as bridges etc. So you might find Russia will keep some of the most modern versions of BTR-82 and possibly a reason for the latest upgrade with konkurs and 30mm gun variant.
I think in the interests of crew and troop protection that the move makes enough sense to upgrade roads and bridges in Russia as well as increase the aircraft transport fleet.
BTR-82s will still be around I suspect but probably with new vehicle turrets.
So I suspect that BMP-3 and BTR-82 will be around for a long time yet, and kurganets and Bumerang will replace only so many, and we may find in the future that another version is designed of a lighter version it really depends on what future warfare will look like.
Once they are ready and developed I think the Kurganets and Boomerang will be the cheapest vehicles to buy and especially in the case of the Wheeled Boomerang and Typhoon they will be the cheapest to operate, but I agree they wont completely get rid of the older vehicles overnight.
There will be regions where nothing better is needed and the existing stuff already works.
Allow me a point of strong disagreement on the feasibility to have a whole division based on just a vehicle family:
It is going to be a long time before they are anywhere close to achieving this, but the idea of improving commonality through the use of vehicle families has a long history in the Soviet military... this is just taking it to its logical conclusion.
It is also a bit like an all stealth fleet... there is theory and there is the real world.
The Russians didn't order 3,500 Su-57s... they ordered 76, which is a decent number to start with to form up a few units for testing and training and to work out details like how easy are they to operate... are they cheap and simple or expensive, time consuming, and not living up to promises.
After a few years of experience they will be able to make decisions going forward about how to proceed... it might be great and they want more, it might be OK and that is enough and just make more drones, it might be terrible so serious changes need to be made or a different direction found...
The point is that they have this family concept.... all the basics are worked out and the first vehicles are either entering limited service or finishing tests.
They might decide that the T-15 is just too expensive.... the plan is not for 80 percent of armoured forces to all be Armata based... it will be more like 10-20% at best and the Armata formations will be for urban combat or fighting in very high intensity places against a peer enemy.
Probably more than half the army will be Boomerang and Typhoon based highly mobile and cheap to buy and maintain being wheeled but all the best sensors and APS systems and drone support and weapons.
A boomerang based vehicle has better armour than all current vehicles except tanks so while compared with a T-90 a Boomerang tank with a T-14 is rather less well protected, the average protection of a force will go up massively.... even more so for Kurganets and Armata based forces.
For DT based vehicles they will be operating in places where the enemy likely has no armoured vehicles so they are better by default.
a such large formation based on Armata chassis would be stopped at the first river it will meet,
They have bridging units and also the ability to snorkle. An Armata unit would not be used to roam large areas of terrain... its heavy protection would be used in urban areas or against enemies with extensive access to modern ATGMs...
In a current large formation for the BMPs to be able to float across and leave the Tanks behind while they wait for bridging equipment or preparations to ford the obstacle is not ideal either as it splits up the force.
an unit based all on Typhoon would be extremely vulnerable,
You mean like the British SAS were terribly vulnerable in the desert with their jeeps... you have Typhoon based units for jobs and situations where mobility is important... especially in 10 years time when they might be carried around by 10-15 ton capacity helicopters...
one based on intermediate ones would became an jack of all trades but a master of none.
The medium ones... Kurganets and Boomerang will likely be the core and vast majority of the new forces... their mobility and fire power will be impressive... the Boomerang in particular will be very cheap to operate and fast moving... with active protection systems and excellent night and all weather optics an visibility they will likely be much better protected than existing types and the fact that they share parts and components makes maintenance even easier.
A major effort on standaedization is obviously needed as a motor rifle regiment with a tank, a BMP one and two BTR battaillons, all based on a different chassis , plus artlllery and AD defence on completely different ones is an absurdity but at a certain point you would have to draw a line between such need of uniformity and combat effectiveness.
Actually the motive behind vehicle unified families was because vehicle families sounds like a good idea but didn't really deliver the promised results.
For instance there are a huge number of a wide variety of different purpose vehicles based on the BMP-1, but there are also a wide range of different purpose vehicles based on the BMP-2, and plenty based on the BMP-3, but each of these three families are not related... so having 6 or 7 vehicles in a unit based on BMPs does not help if the troop transport BMP is a BMP-3, but of the other 5 or 6 BMP based vehicles in the force are a mix of BMP-1 and BMP-2 vehicles... so 6 different vehicles that could share engines and tracks and wheels and transmissions... don't.
By saying... OK this is going to be a heavy unit for urban combat in hot wars so the tank is going to be Armata based T-14, and the troop transport BMP is going to be a T-15, and the armoured recovery vehicle is going to be a T-16, and the self propelled artillery is going to be Coalition which is also Armata based, you already have four vehicles with one engine and one transmission and one track type and one wheel set.
I am talking about the theory... in practise they might decide an all Armata vehicle family does not make sense in practical terms... the vehicles they have made first are front line vehicles that go into the line of fire so having Armata level armour makes a difference. I rather suspect a command Armata tank could also be already made but the are not talking about it... it could just be a T-15 with the Kord HMG turret and the troop compartment filled with communications stuff and lots of aerials... maybe drone control stations...
Over time the other vehicles in this force will be replaced too, but certainly not right away.
A Kurganets based force... we haven't seen the Kurganets vehicle with a T-14 turret so in the mean time they will continue to use the T-90 or upgraded T- 72 tanks as tanks most likely. The Kurganets base vehicle will most likely be the BMP and the BTR, and perhaps a BREM armoured recovery type, though if the units BREM can recover T-90s then it can probably continue being used. The T-16 was a priority because the existing recover vehicle might not have been able to cope with the T-14, so the Kurganets and Boomerang and Typhoon models wont be a high priority.
You cannot have a tank on a Typhoon or a scout car on Armata chassis but you can have all vehicles up to a certain weight based on typhoons, all wheeled vehicles up that limit on Boomerang, all tracked ones on Kurganets until a certain weight, on Armata above them.
If you need a tank where you are using a Typhoon force then use Sprut, or at least its gun and turret.... a 6 wheel Typhoon is probably going to be as heavy as a Sprut at about 18 tons... a Typhoon force needs to be light and mobile which means a tank type support vehicle might not be possible so a fire support vehicle like a Typhoon based BMPT might be used instead.
Armata forces would likely use drones for scouts rather than light weakly protected vehicles, but of course decisions need to be made depending on the circumstances.
A Kurganets vehicle should be able to mount the T-14 turret easily enough... as we have seen the Kurganets and Boomerang chassis are not tiny and the T-14 is not heavily armoured and is therefore relatively light for a turret.
The Boomerang might take the T-14 turret or maybe an unmanned version of the Sprut turret could be adapted that could also be used on a 6 x 6 Typhoon vehicle.
Divisional vehicles would be still be based on older chassis while you concentrate yourself to both modernization and standardization of regiments.
The platoons and regiments will change first but over time if there are no traditional BMPs on front line service (ie no BMP-1,2,3) then why keep them as division level support vehicles?
It might be that at division level all the support vehicles are Kurganets and Boomerang based to reduce costs... they still need to work this out through actual experience in the field.
Nothing is set in stone, but the vehicle families have been decided... and they will gradually replace the old vehicle families.
Also in this, let's allow a minimum of diversification also at this level: T-90, B-19 and Mrsta are still up to the task, so allow one more supply line in a regiment sized unit(but not all three together) wouldn't be so dramatic and it would cut down acquisition time (no need to wait for a kurganet based tank destroyer or an amphibious ARMATA BMP).
In some cases they have plenty of spare parts and the vehicles are familiar... I suspect the priority would be the core vehicles that meet the enemy directly... so tanks, BMPs and BTRs, and in the case of the T-16 they needed recovery vehicles that can handle 50 plus ton vehicles.
For the rest they can take their time... the systems and equipment currently has a standard... the ACRV MTLB based command vehicles will be getting upgrades of equipment like everything else but the next gen systems will be on the new generation vehicles... in the case of the recovery vehicles they made the T-16 first because the existing recovery vehicle can manage T-90s but might not cope with T-14s. but that does not mean Kurganets and Boomerang units need a recovery vehicle right away because their recovery vehicles might be able to cope and they won't get T-16s obviously.
Conversely a Kurganets unit will get the BMP and BTR versions but will keep their existing tanks... a command vehicle like the ACRV that was based on the MTLB vehicle might be replaced with a Kurganets based vehicle and all the equipment inside it will be new generation stuff which can also be used in a Boomerang and Tyhoon and DT and Armata equivalent command vehicle (ie not a command tank... a command vehicle).
This might lead to an Armata regiment of tanks being commanded at division level by a Boomerang based vehicle replacing the old MTLB based ACRV that was previously used just for economic reasons, but the model would be eventually for the ACRV to be replaced by an Armata based vehicle.
For what I know it seems they have experimented T-14, T-15 and B-19 to operate together and are quite entusiastic about how it have worked.
I think the point is that a B-19 is a BMP-3 with a new turret cleared for use on the T-15, so in a unit that will become an Armata unit the B19 simply does not have the armour. When they put T-14s into service they will go to unit that will be Armata units so they will be operating with BMP-3s and BTR-82s to start with, but when T-15s are produced they will be replacing the BMP-3s in that unit while the BTR-82s will be replaced by Armata vehicles with that little Kord armed turret as a BTR.
BMP-3s in all existing units that have BMP-3s can slowly be replaced or upgraded to B19 level, and so a T-15 turret will be working with T-90s and upgraded T-72s in mixed units... but eventually they will be replaced by Armata or Kurganets or Boomerang based BMPs and go into storage.
T-14 and T-15 were used together as a spearpoint BTG, B-19 have been used to cross rivers (in collaboration with engineer units) and seize bridges and fordable points.
And even with amphibious units like Kurganets and Boomerang they will still be transitioning to units that have current existing types and will still try to capture bridges and fords because such locations are valuable... even if a Boomerang units does not need a bridge because they are all amphibious, denying it to the enemy and controlling it is valuable enough.... even just being able to blow it up and block their advance or retreat....