Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues
0nillie0 wrote:Would the 23mm GSh-23V make for a viable weapons platform for a heavy IFV
or even a secondary weapon station on an MBT ?
For example integrated into the T-14 AESA radar and fire control system. Due to its high rate of fire, and given the right ammunition, it might be useful to engage incoming missiles or slow flying shells in a highly hostile environment with no friendly units operating directly around the vehicle.
But is the weapon still in active use mounted on ground platforms in any significant numbers? I tried locating footage of the weapon being fired from a ground platform, but found none. Information about the general performance and capabilities of this weapon also seems to be rare in English.
Is this weapon even suitable for engaging infantry or soft targets on the ground? Is there a place for it in modern combat? If it is still a viable platform in the modern battlefield, could somebody explain the possible advantages it offers?
I know the weapon has obvious drawbacks, i am just curious about this weapon system in particular, and if it has any future with the upcoming generation of armored vehicles.
Even 30mm caliber does not meet full requirements of today, 23mm is beyond any hope. That is why Russia introduced 57mm.
Not just it allows to have whole new level of projectile power. It also opens way for many specialized and smart round options.
Secondary weapons are in 30mm+. And automatic grenade launchers as we already discusses. Gatling guns are too bulky and ammo hungry, yet 23mm just not enough.
American expert complained that data on a new Russian military machine, created on the basis of tank T-14 "Armata" is extremely small. It is known only about the intention of the designers to put on a new weapons platform ship gun caliber 57 mm with a range of 16 kilometers.
However, Dave Majumdar is confident that the new war machine, "which bears the ominous name "Terminator 3" will be quite a formidable opponent to NATO.
"We can conclude that he probably will have a chassis, sensors, passive and dynamic armor of the T-14. He is also likely to carry weapons, which consists of a modern anti-tank missiles and heavy automatic cannon armament. However, details about it is very little. However, it is safe to assume it will be a formidable opponent," writes Dave Majumdar. With him in solidarity and also Russian military analysts.
d_taddei2 wrote:how about replacing the twin 30mm cannons with two 57mm cannons and keep the rest of weapons the same.
It is known only about the intention of the designers to put on a new weapons platform ship gun caliber 57 mm with a range of 16 kilometers.
Zivo wrote:It is known only about the intention of the designers to put on a new weapons platform ship gun caliber 57 mm with a range of 16 kilometers.
Has anyone here seen the source for that? It has always been a possibility, but is it actually confirmed or just an assumption?
This was confirmed by CEO of "Uralvagonzavod" Oleg Sienko: "Russia is also planning to develop a fighting machine with the support of tanks unofficial title" Terminator 3 "based on the latest Russian tank" Armata ". We'll do that. We have a concept "- quoted him as saying The National Interest. But in addition to the confirmation that the new combat vehicle is created on a platform of "Armata was" Siyenko gave no further details on its combat characteristics.
how about replacing the twin 30mm cannons with two 57mm cannons and keep the rest of weapons the same.
Would be interesting isnt it?
no good idea me thinks too heavy, too little ammo and not much advantage over 1x57mm. For heavier punch you need AGTMs for engaging IFV or APC 57mm is more than enough. BTW would love to see invincible AH-64 and A-10 after meeting Russian 57mm round...
Has anyone here seen the source for that? It has always been a possibility, but is it actually confirmed or just an assumption?
I suspect that is kinetic range rather than effective range... the HE rounds might travel that far at optimum angle and for shore bombardment it might be useful... of course with guided shells it might even be effective... don't know... but I would suggest a more conservative 12km range more likely.
artist vision, nice though
Isos wrote:GarryB, I don't understand why you want a 120 mm for a new BMPT.
Having a t-14 hull with a 120mm gun makes it downgraded T-14 not a BMPT. It's suppose to have enough punch with high rate of fire to destroyed armoured carriers and infantery not tanks.
If they achieve to do what you said, they can also add the 23mm canon on T-14, it's the same but with a better main gun.
With more munitions, the T-15 with 57mm gun is comparable to a new bmpt.
IMO, since that version of the gun doesn't penetrate into the hull, something like this would still be a BMP. IF they produce a BMPT, something I'm skeptical about, I think it'll use a modification of the naval version of the 57 turret set on the T-14's hull. This way it could carry much more ammo.
GarryB, I don't understand why you want a 120 mm for a new BMPT.
Having a t-14 hull with a 120mm gun makes it downgraded T-14 not a BMPT. It's suppose to have enough punch with high rate of fire to destroyed armoured carriers and infantery not tanks.
If they achieve to do what you said, they can also add the 23mm canon on T-14, it's the same but with a better main gun.
With more munitions, the T-15 with 57mm gun is comparable to a new bmpt.
120/23 offers more capability than 100/30, with less overlap, in addition to long range top-attack anti-tank rounds which out range all current GLATGMs. So it does hit a lot of the marks to be a excellent BMPT configuration.
The 57mm gun ammo is enormous... almost the size of 76.2mm ammo... there will be no variant with a 57mm gun and no hull penetration. The model for the PT-76 could only carry 120 rounds and the PT-76 is huge.
GarryB wrote:IMO, since that version of the gun doesn't penetrate into the hull, something like this would still be a BMP. IF they produce a BMPT, something I'm skeptical about, I think it'll use a modification of the naval version of the 57 turret set on the T-14's hull. This way it could carry much more ammo.
The 57mm gun ammo is enormous... almost the size of 76.2mm ammo... there will be no variant with a 57mm gun and no hull penetration. The model for the PT-76 could only carry 120 rounds and the PT-76 is huge.
GarryB wrote:
GarryB, I don't understand why you want a 120 mm for a new BMPT.
BMPT is not a tank... don't think of the 120mm gun I am talking about is a mini 125mm gun or a NATO 120mm gun. The weapon I am talking about is like the 120mm gun/mortar of the VENA and NONA... think of it as a direct fire mortar with a range of about 13km or so that can hit point targets and can use guided missiles with a gun launcher instead of an external missile launcher.
The 120mm gun means enemy ATGM teams can be hit and destroyed at great range... so for the BMPT the 120mm gun replaces the four ATAKA missiles as accurate long range HE fire power.
GarryB wrote:
If they achieve to do what you said, they can also add the 23mm canon on T-14, it's the same but with a better main gun.
The main gun on T-14 probably can't elevate as high as a 120mm gun/mortar to hit the upper stories in buildings while operating in a city, and Armata is supposed to be for urban warfare.
GarryB wrote:
With more munitions, the T-15 with 57mm gun is comparable to a new bmpt.
120/23 offers more capability than 100/30, with less overlap, in addition to long range top-attack anti-tank rounds which out range all current GLATGMs. So it does hit a lot of the marks to be a excellent BMPT configuration.
But why to replace? to deal with you have 57mm gun. Max mass of HE in 120mm rouns is about 5kg in Kornet is 10kg so what has bigger punch?
Zivo wrote:But why to replace? to deal with you have 57mm gun. Max mass of HE in 120mm rouns is about 5kg in Kornet is 10kg so what has bigger punch?
Kitolov-2 is SALH guided, and can be fired in a top-attack profile. It has something like 12km of range. For the anti armor roll it's excellent, and for the anti-ATGM team roll... it's a 120mm mortar.
GunshipDemocracy wrote:Zivo wrote:But why to replace? to deal with you have 57mm gun. Max mass of HE in 120mm rouns is about 5kg in Kornet is 10kg so what has bigger punch?
Kitolov-2 is SALH guided, and can be fired in a top-attack profile. It has something like 12km of range. For the anti armor roll it's excellent, and for the anti-ATGM team roll... it's a 120mm mortar.
True but still worse than Kornet. BTW korent´s range is 10km in upgraded version.
Zivo wrote:GunshipDemocracy wrote:Zivo wrote:But why to replace? to deal with you have 57mm gun. Max mass of HE in 120mm rouns is about 5kg in Kornet is 10kg so what has bigger punch?
Kitolov-2 is SALH guided, and can be fired in a top-attack profile. It has something like 12km of range. For the anti armor roll it's excellent, and for the anti-ATGM team roll... it's a 120mm mortar.
True but still worse than Kornet. BTW korent´s range is 10km in upgraded version.
Only with the thermobaric version, HEAT it's 8km, which is still nothing to scoff at. However, it will only have 4-8 rounds depending on the configuration choice they make. The effective range of the 57 is probably around 6km, which is good enough for most tasks, and with guided rounds roughly twice that. Obviously 57/kornet is a good combination. Were it lacks is cost-efficiency, and material destruction. Kornets, while cheap for an ATGM, are more expensive than a 120mm HE mortar bomb, and you can't carry as many of them. If you're attacking a large structure, lobbing a few 120mm rounds will clear it. To use Kornets, $20,000 and half, if not all your thermobaric load. The 57 can pick up a lot of the slack, but it still isn't going to match the efficiency of the 120mm.
Admittedly, my current opinion is that the 57/kornet is probably the better choice for a BMPT. It's a tank support vehicle, and as such, should be with MBT's most of the time. For the most part, the aforementioned disadvantages can be supplemented by an MBT's 125mm gun. War is a team sport.
However, if it was up to me I'd just scrap the BMPT roll. Instead, develop a heavy RWS that replaces the entire bustle and 7.62mm RWS on the T-14, give it a GSh-23 or GSh-30-2 plus a 7.62 coaxial, and put it on every third T-14.
effective range of 120mm is also less them max listed as 13-4km. Sure potential of 57mm round has worse parameters than 120mmm buuut: can be also guided/programmable and 57mm can provide goods level of AA protection not to mention mucho more rounds carried. 57mm might be also cheaper then 120mm if i am correct.
Surprisingly the current 57mm turret does in fact have external magazine storage, and carries 80 rounds. The only protrusion into the hull is a small central support column.
You need bigger punch? AGTM or beam riding cheap rockets like 130mms ones Lighter than 120mm with ammo I presume.
But why to replace? to deal with you have 57mm gun. Max mass of HE in 120mm rouns is about 5kg in Kornet is 10kg so what has bigger punch?
Baikal has 75 degree elevation of 57mm
A 57mm gun armed T-15 would be a powerful IFV, but it would be a troop transport vehicle... I think lighter higher rate of fire weapons (23mm guns and 57mm grenade launchers) plus much heavier guns (120mm gun/mortars) would pack more punch with the rear troop area for extra ammo.... the two vehicle types are for completely different missions.
As for armata variant - the one presented as green little mockup had secondary armament 30mm gun and 4 barrel Gatling ... the only one in Russia so far was Yakushev-Borzov YakB-12.7mm. Interesting if this concept will be followed up.
Werewolf wrote:George1 wrote:Armata T-15 will be BMPT Terminator replacement if i guess right?
IMO, the T-15 looks weak armored when you look at the engine compartment and i hope it is not BMPT replacement, because right now it does not look like it would be capable to drive along side of T-14's and taking hits from Tanks.
I really hope the BMPT is the version with GSh-6-23 gatling or 30mm 2A42.
Home
Latest images
Register
Log in
higurashihougi