BMPT "Terminator"

AJ-47 wrote:
check this:

https://www.rbth.com/defence/2017/06/30/russia-tests-terminator-2-in-syria_792975

That is a hybrid, mixed from the hull of Terminator-1 (T-90 rebuilt) and the turret of Terminator-2 (T-72 rebuilt). That may be what MOD has just ordered a small batch delivered by 2019 to test.

Interlinked wrote:

GarryB wrote:
You have misunderstood what I said.

The rate of fire of the 2A72 is low because the reciprocating parts are heavy... just like using the heavy bolt on the MG-42.

To get a higher rate of fire make the barrel fixed so the part moving back and forward is only the very light bolt... which will move very very fast.... greatly increasing rate of fire.

In that case, I definitely misunderstood what you said, but the bolt of this new weapon that you are proposing would have to be completely different from the 2A72, and you'd need to have a different locking method or some way to access the propellant gas so that the bolt can be unlocked. If modifying the barrel is unacceptable, perhaps a roller-delayed blowback action like the G3 and MP5 would do, or a lever-delayed blowback action like the FAMAS, but regardless, the design of the cannon would have to be overhauled in a major way to accommodate the new locking mechanism. I'm sure it's possible, but highly impractical.

GarryB wrote:
I would actually think twin 23mm guns would offer high rate of fire, max ammo capacity, yet use a standard army calibre (as used in late model Hinds).

I think you'll be interested in this:



GSh-23V or GSh-30K plus an AG-30 grenade launcher on a turret for the BTR and BMP series or an MTLB, or anything, really.

Thoese are some impressive upgrades are they in service yet?

kopyo-21 wrote:

AJ-47 wrote:
check this:

https://www.rbth.com/defence/2017/06/30/russia-tests-terminator-2-in-syria_792975

That is a hybrid, mixed from the hull of Terminator-1 (T-90 rebuilt) and the turret of Terminator-2 (T-72 rebuilt). That may be what MOD has just ordered a small batch delivered by 2019 to test.

Thank you for that, but I thought Terminator one was built on T-55 hull isn't that?

It was in the Army 2017 Forum and Tass call it Terminator-3 check the link below

http://tass.com/defense/961618

AJ-47 wrote:

Thank you for that, but I thought Terminator one was built on T-55 hull isn't that?

It was in the Army 2017 Forum and Tass call it Terminator-3 check the link below

http://tass.com/defense/961618

They called it Terminator 3, because they where confused about what to call it, just like you are right now.
But as other previously said, this is basically a hybrid of the 2 export versions of the "Terminator", so it could be designated as Terminator 3, though we dont know yet how it will be adopted exactly. A number of vehicles will be delivered to the Army during this year for evaluation, so we will not know the exact nomenclature and design for some time (if it is even adopted at all).

The variant that will be evaluated looks to be a combination of the BMPT "Ramka" chassis, as adopted by Kazakhstan (Based on T-90A chassis, retaining the 2 automatic grenade launchers covering the forward arc), combined with the "improved" turret showcased on the the BMPT-72, which did not find any customers so far. Other optional modifications that have been seen on the vehicles are the new ERA models which are field removable. In the press, the vehicles are generally simply reffered to as "Terminators", or sometimes "Terminator 3", to distinguish them from the export variants that are already being offered, though we have seen a number of different variations throughout its existence. In the future, the Russian ground forces variant, if adopted, will receive its own designation. We could see a number of different export variants as well.

The-thing-next-door wrote:
Those are some impressive upgrades are they in service yet?

These variants, designated as MT-LBM in general, are offered by Muromteplovoz, but as far as i know they have not seen any significant adoption by Russian Ground Forces.
It is likely that only a few vehicles exist for demonstration purposes.

MT-LBVMK modification with "Kord" 12.7 mm machine gun instead of NSVT  is the only variant which has seen more widespread adoption in Russian Service AFAIK.

The Azerbaijani Army operates a variant of BRDM-2 equipped with one of those turrets however.

0nillie0 wrote:

AJ-47 wrote:

Thank you for that, but I thought Terminator one was built on T-55 hull isn't that?
It was in the Army 2017 Forum and Tass call it Terminator-3 check the link below

http://tass.com/defense/961618

They called it Terminator 3, because they where confused about what to call it, just like you are right now.
But as other previously said, this is basically a hybrid of the 2 export versions of the "Terminator", so it could be designated as Terminator 3, though we dont know yet how it will be adopted exactly. A number of vehicles will be delivered to the Army during this year for evaluation, so we will not know the exact nomenclature and design for some time (if it is even adopted at all).

The variant that will be evaluated looks to be a combination of the BMPT "Ramka" chassis, as adopted by Kazakhstan (Based on T-90A chassis, retaining the 2 automatic grenade launchers covering the forward arc), combined with the "improved" turret showcased on the the BMPT-72, which did not find any customers so far. Other optional modifications that have been seen on the vehicles are the new ERA models which are field removable. In the press, the vehicles are generally simply reffered to as "Terminators", or sometimes "Terminator 3", to distinguish them from the export variants that are already being offered, though we have seen a number of different variations throughout its existence. In the future, the Russian ground forces variant, if adopted, will receive its own designation. We could see a number of different export variants as well.

Thanks for that. I guess I'll call it Terminator-3 as you said just to distinguish from Terminator 1 & 2.
I thought terminator -3 will be for varient with 57 mm guns. I hope it will come one day.
Syria get some of them and will see what the result of that. BTW Russia lost a plan in Syria and the pilot get killed in a fight on the ground.

@AJ47

Personally I don't thinks the current BMPTs will have chance to get the order from Russian MOD. The BMPTs has been created to protect MBTs, destroy in advance the enemy's anti-tank vehicles, anti-tank weapons and anti-tank troops. For that purpose, the current "Terminator" lack most of what the BMPT must have:

- Long-range reconnaissance/surveillance/aiming systems that can be integrated/connected with UAVs.
- Longer range weapons that well exceed the maximum firing range of enemy's ATGMs.
- The long-range rounds should be cheap.
- Direct/Indirect fire weapons with timely airbrush rounds.
- Precisely guided and fire-and-forget guided weapons.
- Enough reserved ammunitions to stay long on the battle fields.

They seemed to scale up the 14.5mm gun to fire the 23x115mm rounds. However, this is reportedly not choosen by MOD for the up-gun options. They may prefer the proven, high ROF and large-stocked Gsh-23V if the 23x115mm caliber needed.

BRDM-2



MT-LB 6MA

Speaking of the BRDM-2, KBP Tula is offering an upgrade option for the BRDM-2 using a modernized BMD-2 turret with components from the B05Ya01 "Berezhok" turret.

[quote="kopyo-21"]@AJ47

Personally I don't thinks the current BMPTs will have chance to get the order from Russian MOD.

I Dont think so:
Russian machine builder vows to fulfill deliveries of Terminator AFVs by early 2019
The Russian Defense Ministry signed a contract to deliver Terminators during the Army-2017 forum
MOSCOW, January 31. /TASS/. The implementation of the contract to deliver Terminator tank support armored fighting vehicles will be completed in early 2019, and the army will get the first batch in March -April 2018, the Research and Production Corporation Uralvagonzavod told TASS.

"It [the contract - TASS] is long-term. We plan to deliver the first batch of the tank support fighting vehicles this March - April. The whole contract will be completed by early 2019. The volume of deliveries is confidential, but overall it provides for the organization of operational testing for these specified products," the corporation said.

Chief of the Main Armored Directorate of the Russian Defense Ministry Lieutenant General Alexander Shevchenko earlier said that the Terminator AFV would become operational in 2017. He noted that "this is a brand-new class of vehicle" "that many countries, chiefly Israel and Syria, are interested in." The general specified that the AFV had successfully passed all test operations.

The Russian Defense Ministry signed a contract to deliver Terminators during the Army-2017 forum. The agreements that the defense ministry and Uralvagonzavod inked then are worth over 24 bln rubles ($426.3 mln) The Terminator has a 44-tonne combat weight, according to the producer’s website. The vehicle is outfitted with two 30-mm-caliber 2A42 automatic guns and 7.62-mm-caliber PKT coaxial tank machine gun.

More:
http://tass.com/defense/987812


The BMPTs has been created to protect MBTs, destroy in advance the enemy's anti-tank vehicles, anti-tank weapons and anti-tank troops. For that purpose, the current "Terminator" lack most of what the BMPT must have:

- Long-range reconnaissance/surveillance/aiming systems that can be integrated/connected with UAVs.
- Longer range weapons that well exceed the maximum firing range of enemy's ATGMs.
- The long-range rounds should be cheap.
- Direct/Indirect fire weapons with timely airbrush rounds.
- Precisely guided and fire-and-forget guided weapons.
- Enough reserved ammunitions to stay long on the battle fields.


All what the BMPT need to have are 2 things: 1. weapons that have high elevation to shoot against enemy sitting in higher place than you and fan hit you from the top. The BMP-1 didn’t have it, only the BMP-2 that replaces the BMP-1 get this ability.
2. The vehicle needs to have better armor protection from MG and RPG like weapons.
3. All what you write might needed, but don’t put it on the BMPT that's above the level of the BMPT.
[size=16]

"The first batch" that Ural mentioned is a small number and for testing only, not for official accepting and purchasing yet. The current elevation 45° of 30mm guns on Terminator-1/2-3 is still under expectation that should be at least above 60°.

kopyo-21 wrote:"The first batch" that Ural mentioned is a small number and for testing only, not for official accepting and purchasing yet. The current elevation 45° of 30mm guns on Terminator-1/2-3 is still under expectation that should be at least above 60°.

TASS reports a contract worth 426 million dollars (if this is correct). Thats more than a few a vehicles, even if part of that money goes to further R&D and setting up production lines.

The problem with the 57mm weapon system is that multipe "players" are involved in its development. The more manufacturers are involved, the more things get complicated and delayed. Even though UVZ offers (or offered) the early AU-220M turret on the Atom 8x8, it would likely prefer to manufacture its own modules for the BMPT.

As far as i know, UVZ manufactures the turret for the current "Terminator 3" in house, and this turret is ready for mass production NOW, and more or less proven to work. FCS components are tried and tested on the weapon platforms.  If the MoD feels that they need a vehicle like this ASAP, they will not wait for a new turret, and would certainly prefer a weapon system that will be easier to learn by the crew, cheaper to produce and faster to enter service. When the 57mm is ready (keep in mind that turrets for SPAAG and turret for tank escort have verry different requirements), then we will see modernised variants trickle into service as required ( as has always been the case ).

The one thing that i still dont really understand is the 5 man crew. This requires a significant change in doctrine and training, and i still hope they find some other solution for this before adopting the vehicle in larger scale.

Very upset to heard MoD has chosen that.

I think the problem is not because of 5 crews but the limitations of two 30mm grenade launchers in the front of hull. The short firing range and the narrow field-of-fire make their effectiveness extremely limitted. If they replace them by the 40mm grenade Ags-40 Balkan guns and install them probably in two 3-axis stabilized turrets with separated electronic optical, they will be very lethal istead.

Kopyo, do you know what the 3rd axis is in "3-axis stabilization"?

The pre BMPT vehicle like object 781, 782, 787 had AGL 40mm. Is that correct?

They said "30/40 mm grenade guns" that means either of them could be used up to requirements and logistic conditions. At that time and even now, the 30mm grenade caliber has been much more popular in Army.

Fire test of the 2A72 cannon for the new delivered БТР-82Аs for Azerbaijan in the latest 2 years.

GarryB wrote:I am wondering if they will buy BTRT vehicles based on old T-72 chassis as well as new T-90s and BMPTs based on T-72s as a transition to armata based divs.

You actually raise an interesting question, though i am not sure it belongs in this topic.

I was recently thinking about the BMO-T "Flamethrower", which is based on the T-72, and has a capacity of up to 7 dismounts. It entered service at least 10 years ago (but in only limited numbers) and was recently showcased again in live fire demonstrations. I dont reallly see a reason for "showcasing" this vehicle other than export potential.

Though the BMO-T itself is a niche vehicle, which does not fit in with the doctrine of most other armies, with some minor adjustments it could actually work as decent heavy infantry fighting vehicle.
The advanced stage of development of platforms such as Kurganets have probably made such an IFV obsolete for Russia, but i find it somewhat odd that in the past decade we did not see this platform offered for a stop gap measure IFV design.  

In terms of crew comfort and ease of dismounting, it is far from ideal, but certainly not much worse then a BMP-3 or BMD-4M, which are beeing delivered to this day. In terms of protection, it is overall more protected then a BMP3. It is mostly based on the well known T-72, and with an engine upgrade it has excellent power to weight ratio. The likely reason why this has not happened, is most probably the lack of room for impleneting a turret. We see in the BTR-T (though based on the T-55 chassis) that adding even a small one man turret reduces the dismount capacity to 5, which is simply not enough IMHO.

Today we see much improvements in the capabilities of unmanned turrets which have little penetration into the crew compartment. I am sure they could arm it up to the same level of the BMP-2 Berezhok. If not for domestic use, surely they could develop a cost effective infantry fighting vehicle for export customers. After all, the T-72A is probably one of the most commonly used MBT's in the world. Many 3rd world countries however lack adequatly protected IFV's, and have more need for those than their inventory of MBT's. This concept is verry similar to the BMPT, but again, most countries dont need dedicated tank escorts, and would rather have vehicles suitable for both troop transport and front line infantry support.

And should development of the Kurganets or T-15 stall further, then yes, it may prove to be a usefull stop gap measure or even a cheap, fast to mass produce alternative in wartime.

0nillie0 wrote:

GarryB wrote:I am wondering if they will buy BTRT vehicles based on old T-72 chassis as well as new T-90s and BMPTs based on T-72s as a transition to armata based divs.

You actually raise an interesting question, though i am not sure it belongs in this topic.

I was recently thinking about the BMO-T "Flamethrower", which is based on the T-72, and has a capacity of up to 7 dismounts. It entered service at least 10 years ago (but in only limited numbers) and was recently showcased again in live fire demonstrations. I dont reallly see a reason for "showcasing" this vehicle other than export potential.

Though the BMO-T itself is a niche vehicle, which does not fit in with the doctrine of most other armies, with some minor adjustments it could actually work as decent heavy infantry fighting vehicle.
The advanced stage of development of platforms such as Kurganets have probably made such an IFV obsolete for Russia, but i find it somewhat odd that in the past decade we did not see this platform offered for a stop gap measure IFV design.  

In terms of crew comfort and ease of dismounting, it is far from ideal, but certainly not much worse then a BMP-3 or BMD-4M, which are beeing delivered to this day. In terms of protection, it is overall more protected then a BMP3. It is mostly based on the well known T-72, and with an engine upgrade it has excellent power to weight ratio. The likely reason why this has not happened, is most probably the lack of room for impleneting a turret. We see in the BTR-T (though based on the T-55 chassis) that adding even a small one man turret reduces the dismount capacity to 5, which is simply not enough IMHO.

Today we see much improvements in the capabilities of unmanned turrets which have little penetration into the crew compartment. I am sure they could arm it up to the same level of the BMP-2 Berezhok. If not for domestic use, surely they could develop a cost effective infantry fighting vehicle for export customers. After all, the T-72A is probably one of the most commonly used MBT's in the world. Many 3rd world countries however lack adequatly protected IFV's, and have more need for those than their inventory of MBT's. This concept is verry similar to the BMPT, but again, most countries dont need dedicated tank escorts, and would rather have vehicles suitable for both troop transport and front line infantry support.

And should development of the Kurganets or T-15 stall further, then yes, it may prove to be a usefull stop gap measure or even a cheap, fast to mass produce alternative in wartime.

Some good points here although you state that some armies don't require dedicated tank escorts but bmpt isn't just used for that and some armies who are currently sitting heavy on MBTs are now looking to diversify as situation changes. If you look at Peru for instance they recently were looking to convert some of their T-55 to BTRT / bmpt turret. And countries like south Africa who have never really needed much in the way of MBTs may be more suited to bmpt vehicle so potential is there for export especially if they make unmanned turret versions. I agree that BMO -T is more a niche market as some countries may just opt for a IFV or APC that's already in service with them attach rocket screens and arm troops with RPO rather than spend more on the BMO-T even it's more armoured. U might find Russia just sticks an RPO armed squad into a typhoon for the same purpose.

Does anyone know about this BMP-2 variant? The gun looks strange but it obviously is 2a72. This gun looks quite the same the 2a72 gun on the BMP-3 dislayed in Kubina museum.

The new BMPT getting ready for delivery.

https://www.youtube.com/embed/A5QNJLBxeC8

Which version did they go with 3 or 5 men crew?

If 3 then great, if 5 then WTF?

https://sdelanounas.ru/blogs/105087/