Obviously we dissagree about the 45mm caliber, that it is still present and used in some recent ships, but also is the natural successor, at the right time of the current 30mm caliber high fire rate weapons in the aircrafts and in land weapon.
You were referring to the old obsolete naval 45mm calibre... that is dead.
I thought you were referring to the new telescopic case 45mm that competed for the new IFV cannon for the Russian Army.
It seems to have failed in competition with the 57mm round.
It is necessary to a apply an overall view on calibers, not only a view based on the land weapons. The step between the 30mm and the 57mm caliber is too big without the 45mm caliber in the middle.
The 45mm does not add anything though... it is just an extra calibre that does not have the shell weight of the 57mm round nor the high rate of fire of the 30mm round.
The main feature of the 30mm round is the much higher hit probability because of its high rate of fire. If the 57mm uses guided shells and a sophisticated capable guidance system then the high rate of fire becomes redundant and unnecessary.
Small fast targets will either be hit by a shell or not... if the rounds don't hit then they don't explode and blow past the target with no effect except hitting the water a few kms from the ship. A more sophisticated shell with a sensor fuse or guidance or both means even a near miss will result in fragments damaging the target, or a direct hit with one or two rounds instead of 200 or more of which one or two might hit.
And high rate of fire weapons will continue being developed and used for long time.
Their purpose was to improve the hit probability against small manouvering targets. Rounds that don't manouver after you fire them... like 30mm cannon shells... will miss the instant the target speeds up or slows down after the 30mm round has been fired. Firing a burst of 200 rounds with the natural inaccuracy of the round means a scatter of impact points in a large blob around the point of aim... like a shotgun blast. This means if the target climbs or descends or speeds up or slows down between the time the rounds leave the muzzle and the 30mm cannon shells arrive on target then there is still a chance of a few hits. The higher the rate of fire the denser the pattern of impact points the more likely a hit or multiple hits.
With guided rounds rate of fire becomes irrelevant... and even wasteful.
I'm sure new 45mm weapons will appear in the form of high fire rate weapons, and also in the form of grenade launchers (also used in the Navy recently and for planned for future ships).
Can you provide more info about this calibre and these weapons... AFAIK there is only the Balkan 40mm grenade launcher and the 57mm grenade launcher being introduced...
Ahhh, hang on... are you talking about the 45mm hand held anti saboteur grenade launchers of the Russian Navy.
They are low velocity grenades that have zero capability in fitting between a 30mm gatling and a 57mm gun.
They have an effective range of 400m... less than a PKM.
The old single barrel DP-61 is being replaced by the DP-64 which has two barrels one over the other. There are no automatic versions... they are used to engage enemy frogmen and to mark their position.
The larger models for deck mount use 55mm calibre grenades... they are all manually loaded and have one barrel per round, so you can't really call them automatic cannon.
It was reported to be a STANAG Level 5 vehicle. Fairly over most of the current infantry vehicles, including all the US vehicles, if I'm not wrong, and fairly over the Russian standards. It were 31 tons.
Were any even real or just mockups...
I doubt it was a functional ready for production vehicle... and even if it was... it was French... so no point in the Russians using it... they would make the factories and build 5 thousand and then France will refuse to deliver them and end up selling them to Paraguay.
I'm sure Russia applied in the development of the Bumerang many of the ideas developed in the Typhoon 6x6 and Atom projects.
I doubt it... typhoon was a parallel project.
Reading again the new, yes, it is possible that this concept is the update of the BMPT-72. In this case I think it is interesting, I would support the project with some weapon that allows the vehicle to work also outside of the range of the portable-man/portable weapons of the adversary. I always considered this project interesting because it was done over the right basis.
I still find it very confusing... the original purpose of the BMPT was a support vehicle that could move with tanks and provide support to those tanks against things the tanks were not very good at dealing with... 20 years ago that was helicopters, infantry with ATGMs, and also infantry with RPGs in the top floors of buildings or in basements where the main guns of MBTs could not elevate to engage.
Previously this role was performed by air defence gun vehicles where their extreme fire power was devastating... the US did much the same with the Duster AA vehicle armed with two 40mm cannon in Vietnam, later replaced by the M163 which was an M113 APC with a 6 barrel 20mm cannon mounted on the roof as a sort of anti ambush convoy protection vehicle.
The thing is that there is already a vehicle designed to take on targets a tank has problems dealing with... it carries troops into combat and is called an IFV (note not an APC which has much lighter armament).
The problem with the IFV is its lighter armour means they can be picked off leaving the tanks vulnerable.
One solution was the BMPT, but the other solution is the Armata family of vehicles where the IFVs have the necessary weapons and firepower and protection (the troop compartment in the armata IFV should be a separate comparment with the engine in front and crew in an armoured capsule with the turret next with no crew inside and then to the rear the troop compartment... the rear troop compartment could be filled with more ammo in a BMPT version... so there would be no need for an extra vehicle family type.
Of course you could argue that another family member just adds capability and flexibility... there will be an air defence model, there will be a mortar carrier model there will be an IFV model, and likely an APC model with external gun mount and larger troop compartment.
Adding a BMPT model could be a variation of the IFV model or the Mortar carrier model or the air defence gun model...
It is my personal opinion that the IFV model in its final version will have a 57mm gun and Kornet missiles so it can deal with most armoured vehicles except tanks with the gun and tanks with the missiles. The mortar carrier vehicle in my opinion will be like a super Vena with a long barrel 120mm gun/mortar, which would also be a potent anti infantry vehicle and a threat to enemy air power with guided rounds. The air defence vehicle in my opinion, will have a dual feed 57mm gun and a large supply of ready to fire ammo, and a light cheap simple missile... the SOSNA-R has a range of 10km and a high velocity and uses simple cheap beam riding technology.
Another vehicle I think will have more capable radar and sensors and carry Pantsir-SM missiles and operate with the gun armed vehicle... I don't think there is enough room on the Armata vehicle for a 57mm gun and ammo plus the Pantsir missile system and all its associated electronics and sensors... I do think a gun/missile mix makes sense and by putting sensors on the missile vehicle it keeps the gun vehicle a bit cheaper, but their use together gives the best of both worlds while keeping costs down.
Note the Tunguska was expensive, but combined the performance of the Shilka and the SA-13 and exceeded both systems in terms of performance while costing less than having both systems together.
There was a model of an Armata based BMPT vehicle with a 120mm gun/mortar, and a 40 or 57mm grenade launcher and what looked like a 23mm gatling gun... in my opinion that would be an ideal combination for such a vehicle... its addition into the Armata family would be very good... in low intensity conflicts where the chance of coming across enemy armour is low to zero then it could be used as an armoured gun platform like a tank but much more flexible and not so over powered... it would also be ideal as a convoy escort vehicle and a fire support vehicle for fighting in built up areas.