BMPT "Terminator"

The Deputy Defense Minister announced the identification of the shortcomings of the BMPT "Terminator" during the exercise

It is reported that during the KSHU (command post exercises) "Kavkaz-2020", certain shortcomings of the BMPT "Terminator" were identified. This was stated by the deputy head of the Russian defense department, Lieutenant General Yunus-Bek Yevkurov.

On the air of TK Zvezda, General Yevkurov noted that a special experiment was carried out for the latest tank support combat vehicle . It involved nine units of the BMPT "Terminator". According to Yevkurov, these were severe tests for a combat vehicle, and during these tests, shortcomings were identified.

The Deputy Minister of Defense did not specify what specific shortcomings were being discussed. However, earlier materials appeared in open sources that one of them may be insufficient for modern combat anti-tank missile ammunition. It consisted in the original versions of the "Terminator" of 4 "Attack-T" ammunition, spending which the BMPT crew had to switch to using automatic cannons. And on some cannons of 30 mm caliber with the support of tanks, as they say, you can't go far today.

The disadvantages that were noted by military experts also included the declared weak security of weapons and ammunition - the same arrangement of automatic guns.

According to the latest information, the manufacturers have taken into account the shortcomings identified during the exercises conducted at the Terminator BMPT. According to Lieutenant General Yevkurov, today the combat vehicle is being tested in the Central Military District. The Deputy Minister of Defense noted that after the final conclusion of the state commission, the BMPT "Terminator" will enter service.

If you look back through some of the early discussions we have had regarding the BMPT one model shown had a 120mm gun/mortar armed vehicle with what we guessed was a 23mm six barrel gatling gun for light cannon fire power and what was probably either a 40mm grenade launcher or perhaps a 57mm grenade launcher mounted on what appeared to be an Armata like chassis.

I thought at the time that that was a good compromise because the 120mm gun offered more than four ready to fire missiles plus also direct fire HE fire power of a substantial nature, while the 23mm cannon uses compact relatively low velocity projectiles that are nonetheless quite heavy for their calibre and a rate of fire that would deliver these rounds in clusters on target like a shotgun blast of explosive projectiles.

The grenade launcher offered low velocity HE to deliver rounds behind frontal cover... with UAVs you can spot targets or groups hiding behind walls or even hedgerows and being able to lob low velocity HE rounds over frontal cover would be valuable.

Note current upgraded BMP-2s have 30mm grenade launchers mounted on the top rear of their turrets to provide such capacity despite the main gun also being 30mm it is a flat shooting high velocity round so they are different enough to be complimentary.

A 120mm gun with high elevation capability has the potential to be used as a direct fire gun with shells out to 13km, which is about the range tanks can fire but tanks have a very limited elevation potential... normally not much better than 25 degrees, so the 120mm gun/mortar can fire rounds on a steeper angle that come down near vertically and offer better fragmentation performance from the side walls of the shell when it is near vertical.

It can also fire 120mm guided missiles (Gran designed for 120mm mortar fire), as well as 122mm Kitilov guided missiles designed for the 122mm artillery piece, it should be able to fire 120mm shells with a bag type propellent like a Howitzer, and also standard mortar bombs out to 6-7km which would be rather potent and effective too.

The BMP-3 armament would also be interesting as an option too in the sense that the 100mm gun is smaller and lighter but the HE rounds are big and potent and recoil is not that bad for a heavy tank based vehicle... the 100mm rounds are compact and mostly HE so within a given space it can carry a lot of rounds plus missiles internally.

We discussed the new 57mm gun too as being an interesting combination of HE and AP, but we didn't really consider the grenade launcher...

With laser detonated HE rounds all of these projectiles become vastly more potent against targets on the ground and in the air.

I thought a solution could be a 100mm rifled gun from the BMP-3, with the 30mm gun replaced with the twin barrel 30mm gun from the Hind for rate of fire...

It is a tricky one...

That makes sense. If we look at recent conflicts involving tanks operating in urban areas the most common battle damage would be enemy sniper fire on sensitive externally mounted equipment like optics and comms gear, and shaped charge attacks, which while they mostly don't pierce the armor enough to matter, could still wreck stuff outside the armor. They could still work however, since the tank has enough redundant systems that it could still operate though in a degraded mode. Removing the armor protecting the unduplicated guns and the fire control makes it a lot easier to disable the firepower on the BMPT. Even the T-14 had proper tank level passive protection for its gun housed as it is in an unmanned turret, as well as the more modern turrets coming out of the woodwork like the Bumerang-BM, though to a lesser extent of course.

Talking of armaments, I really like the idea of simply just getting that 57 mm low velocity gun integrated with the T-14's turret. An autocannon as a secondary armament has been proposed before on other vehicles like the Object 195 and the Swedish next gen tank mainly as a means to supplement the reduced main gun ammo load and while the T-14 isn't exactly hurting for ammo the extra weapon can be useful for engaging targets out of reach of the main gun's elevation and depression range, as well as sparing the main gun ammo from piddling targets of course. The Russians also seem to have gotten over their reluctance to store ammo in the bustle so there shouldn't be a problem with adopting this layout. Between programmable HE-frag and the 57 mm cannon as a sort of back scratcher for when the main gun can't quite reach you could get a vehicle that reasonably approaches the performance of the BMPT without bothering with integrating a brand new niche into the overall doctrine and retraining personnel to handle these new vehicles.

A 57mm grenade launcher on its own with the 125mm gun removed would be interesting... especially with HE frag rounds with laser command detonation fuses and of course it can also use APFSDS rounds for use against medium armoured targets too...

Pack the turret out with Bulet and Kornet missiles and perhaps even an 82mm automatic mortar mounted on the rear turret bustle that can be elevated independently with a belt feed of 82mm mortar bombs like a Vasilek automatic mortar... with coaxial machine guns with the 57mm and 82mm guns while a commanders RCWS with a twin barrel 23mm cannon with coaxial PKT MG in support perhaps so the commander can shoot targets with rifle calibre ammo or 23mm cannon shells, while the gunner can aim and fire say a 57mm gun with perhaps a coaxial Kord HMG or an 82mm mortar with a coaxial rifle calibre MG... the 57mm gun and Kord 12.7mm gun could elevate from -15 degrees to 80 degrees, while the 82mm mortar could be designed to elevate to 85 degrees with perhaps zero degrees depression.

In certain conflicts the 82mm could carry smoke and illumination and HE rounds, while the 57mm gun could have laser command detonation HE rounds and APFSDS rounds and perhaps an APHE to punch through light cover like bunkers or buildings or light vehicles...

Replacing the 125 gun frees up an enormous amount of space below the turret ring. That, plus the bustle stowage could see BMPT vehicles armed with smaller calibre weaponry with enough ammo for entire days worth of heavy fighting. One could replicate what the Americans did in Fallujah with Abrams crews packing every available space within the vehicle with rifle and HMG ammo boxes that they could hose every possible firing position with MG and HMG fire for hours on end, only with greater lethality.

The key is to get the right mix of capabilities...

Accurate direct fire HE, indirect HE fire, direct kinetic fire... and airburst HE fire that can be used against targets behind cover or airborne targets...

If they can fit laser command detonation tail fuses to 30mm cannon shells then they should be able to do the same with 57mm grenade rounds and 40mm grenade rounds too...  as well as 82mm mortar bombs and shells.

The very idea of a thick walled grenade launcher able to fire high pressure high velocity APFSDS is brilliant and could be applied to 82mm Vasilek mortars so you could use standard 82mm mortar bombs and also shells like the Vena/Nona systems do... and also the 100mm gun of the BMP-3...

A mix of how velocity and high velocity has always been useful... a BMP-3 with its high velocity 30mm cannon and its medium pressure 100mm rifled HE rounds was a clever and useful combination... different targets on the battlefield require different weapon types to deal with efficiently including at different ranges.

At close range an armoured vehicle would be easiest to take on using a 30mm cannon, but a 30mm cannon against a heavy vehicle at more than 3km range is a bit of a waste of time. Equally heavy bunkers made of sand and large rocks is not something a 30mm gun has the HE power to clear rapidly, but a helicopter 3km away you can plaster.

The 100mm gun is a good way to deal with enemy troops in the open in groups... it will stop an IED vehicle with one clean shot... for heavy bunkers or targets in buildings or fortified positions... or even ATGM teams out to 5-6km range you could lob a few bombs amongst the enemy to deal with them.

It has a low rate of fire and a low velocity, but that means enemy firing over a wall means you can lob shells over the wall and directly hit the enemy forces behind the wall without having to penetrate the wall or knock the wall down...

The main reason there is a 100mm gun and a 30mm cannon on the BMP-3 was the HE power of the 73mm rocket grenade launcher of the BMP-1 was actually found to be useful in some situations, but nearly useless in others. The same was found with the 30mm cannon of the BMP-2.

The 73mm weapon of the BMP-1 is essentially an SPG-9 recoilless rifle RPG with the exhaust end closed and was only expected to be used out to 800m or so to cover the 500m dead zone where the AT-3 was being captured in the guidance system and couldn't hit targets.

They decided with the BMP-3 that they needed HE firepower... but better and useful out to much better range than the 73mm rockets of the BMP-1, but also 30mm cannon power for armour piercing rounds to penetrate enemy BMPs.

The 57mm grenade launcher they have now is actually an excellent replacement for both... being a grenade launcher its HE capacity is much better than the BMP-1s 73mm gun... though it is not as powerful as the 100mm HE rounds which are huge. It also has an APFSDS round which should have armour penetration performance that is much better than any model 30mm cannon used anywhere simply because of the shell volume available for powder and the length available for the penetrator.

So not quite as good HE as the 100mm on the BMP-3 but much better armour penetration compared with the 30mm cannon.

Using the 57mm grenade launcher on a BMPT means direct and indirect fire HE firepower is covered and the armour piercing power of a 30mm cannon is covered... but what is missing is the rate of fire blast of a couple of 30mm cannon like the current terminator achieves and the Shilka and Tunguska vehicles previously used for the job. It doesn't need armour penetration performance but good HE frag weight is useful so I would suggest a coaxial heavy calibre machine gun for the 57mm gun and a twin barrel 23mm cannon as carried by the current model Hinds in a chin mounted turret. The 23 x 115mm shells are relatively small for cannon shells so it could carry a lot but the HE rounds are the same 23mm projectiles used in the 23 x 152mm high velocity guns of the Shilka which were designed to bring down aircraft. The twin barrel gun has a rate of fire of about 3,500rpm which is just over 50 shells a second so a quarter second burst sends 15-20 shells down range like a shotgun blast... with each shell being an explosive HE projectile. Its modern muzzle velocity of 700m/s should be fine...

Mount the twin barrel 23mm gun on the other side of the 57mm gun in an independently elevating coaxial mount...

A 40mm grenade launcher and rifle calibre machine gun on the commanders stabilised 360 degree sight and an 82mm Vasilek automatic mortar (belt fed perhaps) with two or three different belt feeds that can be selected by the gunner mounted on the rear turret bustle to fire from horizontal up to 80 degrees or so.

Coaxial rifle calibre machine guns on the commanders sight and 82mm turret bustle gun for shooting at drones or targets within 1km cheaply with large amount of ready to fire ammo.

40mm grenade launcher on the commanders optic to reach out to 2.5km and good for area targets, while the 23mm twin barrel gun mounted next to the 57mm gun could be used out to 4-5km against soft targets, while the 57mm grenade launcher could be used to 6km and the 12.7mm Kord also mounted coaxially with the 57mm gun should reach to 2-3km too...

With that sort of fire power I probably wouldn't even bother with missiles... the 57mm gun should be able to place a HE round within a few metres of most targets where the laser fuse could airburst detonate them...

82mm mortar bombs and 82mm shells would also be potent rounds against area targets too.

The Ministry of Defense has completed the first stage of testing the BMPT "Terminator"

The first stage of testing the Terminator tank support combat vehicle (BMPT) has been completed in the Central Military District . The press service of the district reports.

According to the report, the first part of the experiment on the use of BMPT ended at a tank range in the Chelyabinsk region. At the first stage, the main attention was paid to the study of controls and weapons systems. Assistance in the study of BMPT was provided by the specialists of the manufacturer (Uralvagonzavod - approx.)

During the trial application, which started on December 1, 2020, the crews conducted a series of driving, fire and technical training sessions

- the message says.

The second stage of the experiment, the start date of which has not been named, will be devoted to the use of BMPTs in the battle formations of tank units. Shooting will also be practiced in various tactical situations.

Recall that the first batch of eight BMPT "Terminator" entered the 90th Panzer Division, stationed in the Chelyabinsk region, for trial operation at the end of November 2020. Prior to that, BMPT was checked during the "Kavkaz-2020" command-and-control system.

BMPT "Terminator" is made on the chassis of the T-72. The vehicle is armed with two 30mm 2A42 automatic cannons, a 7.62mm PKT machine gun, and four launch containers for the 9M120 guided missiles (Attack complex).

Anyone know what this thing is? ....talk about armed to the teeth ...looks like some sort of Unmanned vehicle

Stryker is the closest counterpart to Terminator. I like the manpads launcher. 2 Iglas-S on Terminator would be nice. I'm also surprised by Hellfire missile being used against drone, even if they would suck against manoeuvring targets.

With increasing use of drones like TB2 or Orion type they will have to increase the number of AD missile. Manpads are good against them.

They will also have to hide vehicles from airborne detection tools. Nadikta will need to be used in great numbers. That will oblige the drones to come closer in manpad range.

Stryker is the closest counterpart to Terminator. I like the manpads launcher. 2 Iglas-S on Terminator would be nice. I'm also surprised by Hellfire missile being used against drone, even if they would suck against manoeuvring targets.

Not even close.

The whole purpose of Terminator is tank level protection... Stryker is a joke in that regard... and honestly air burst 30mm cannon shells with laser detonation will be all you would need for small drones... and for big ones the Russian armour operates under a dense air defence system from Igla-S and Verba, through Strela-10, Tunguska, TOR, Pantsir, BUK, S-300V4, S-400, ... with Pine, S-350, and S-500 and 2S38, soon to be added.

Terminator is intended to operate with Tanks in places where it is too dangerous for troops out in the open, because it is an urban area or the enemy has plentiful anti armour and sniper equipment... the Terminator is not intended for taking down drones as a normal part of its operational role... it will be working with a force that includes proper air defence vehicles already...

In this sort of environment this thinly armoured Stryker would be picked off easily and quickly.

If you want a US equivalent of Terminator then the closest they got was likely the 40mm Duster air defence vehicle that was used in anti ambush roles for convoy support during the war in Vietnam... it was based on a tank of course but had an unarmoured open top turret.They also used the 20mm 6 barrel gatling armed M163 for the job because of its rate of fire but its M113 chassis makes it vulnerable too.

The next attempt would probably be the M3 Bradley... which was essentially a fire support version of the Bradley that carried 50 % more of all ammo in the troop compartment instead of carrying troops.

It still really does not match properly because it was not armoured to the level of a main battle tank... but as previous vehicles used by the Soviets were just AA guns with their electronics removed and more ammo piled in then they can be considered versions... just not very good examples of where they are now with the Terminator concept.

Convoy support, anti ambush, and BMP replacement in heavy battle situations... but possibly fire power vehicle to use instead of a MBT for use in situations where a MBT might not be needed... like when the enemy has no heavy armour...

Isos wrote:Stryker is the closest counterpart to Terminator. I like the manpads launcher. 2 Iglas-S on Terminator would be nice. I'm also surprised by Hellfire missile being used against drone, even if they would suck against manoeuvring targets.

With increasing use of drones like TB2 or Orion type they will have to increase the number of AD missile. Manpads are good against them.

They will also have to hide vehicles from airborne detection tools. Nadikta will need to be used in great numbers. That will oblige the drones to come closer in manpad range.

It is interesting comparison. Stryker IM-SHORAD is dedicated air defense system, although in my opinion inferior to LAV-AD, while BMPT is not air defense system. BMPT could do air defense role in self defense, but it is not its primary role. Limitation is not enough elevation of guns. But if needed it could still be good in this role. Placing 4 anti air verions of Ataka missiles, which will be more capable for this job than Hellfire or Stinger and using air burst programable ammunition for guns, made it very dangerous, even for drones.

Would be interesting to compare this Stryker with Uran-9 robot. It's lighter, less armor and no crew inside.

A better shorad arrangement would be Pine missiles and Bulat missiles, but I would think a 57mm gun along with a single 30mm cannon with airburst ammo would be the best choice against most light drones in terms of cost efficiency.

I would add that while the 57mm grenade launcher does not fire a HE round as potent as the 100mm gun of the BMP-3 it has a very powerful HE bomb and its rate of fire should more than make up for reduced payload per round. It would also carry rather more rounds of ammo.

Cyberspec wrote:Anyone know what this thing is? ....talk about armed to the teeth ...looks like some sort of Unmanned vehicle

The Uran-9 might actually be a better fit in the BMPT role come to think about it. It has poor armor, sure, but they're talking about basing it on BMP-3s so its not that much huge of a leap if they decide to do so on a T-90 or better yet, an Armata chassis later on. Also, despite additional issues related to teleoperation, the wide suite of electro-optics and image tracking might just make it that the Uran-9 might actually have a better situational awareness than even the BMPT its 5 set of eyes onboard looking around. Actually make that pretty much just two set of eyes since the driver and two hull gunners have what amounts to WW2 triplexes which are just trash.

Isos wrote:Stryker is the closest counterpart to Terminator. I like the manpads launcher. 2 Iglas-S on Terminator would be nice. I'm also surprised by Hellfire missile being used against drone, even if they would suck against manoeuvring targets.

With increasing use of drones like TB2 or Orion type they will have to increase the number of AD missile. Manpads are good against them.

They will also have to hide vehicles from airborne detection tools. Nadikta will need to be used in great numbers. That will oblige the drones to come closer in manpad range.

Its closest counterpart is the Gibka-S VSHORAD. Only being on a stryker, its needlessly costly, and the added hellfire support and wtf 4 phased arrays for each vehicle just takes the cake for unnecessary value adding grift.

Stryker IM-SHORAD is quite expensive at 8+ million $ per vehicle. Such weak armored vehicle should never be in the first line and BMPT is made exactly for that porpouse to replace such expensive air defense vehicles in ground combat. BMPT is not cheap either, but it have tank armor and could be with tanks in the same first line. Ataka missile is in the same level as Hellfire missile and guns are more powerful.

GarryB wrote:A better shorad arrangement would be Pine missiles and Bulat missiles, but I would think a 57mm gun along with a single 30mm cannon with airburst ammo would be the best choice against most light drones in terms of cost efficiency.

I would add that while the 57mm grenade launcher does not fire a HE round as potent as the 100mm gun of the BMP-3 it has a very powerful HE bomb and its rate of fire should more than make up for reduced payload per round. It would also carry rather more rounds of ammo.

Russian army plan to instal Sosna complex on BTR-82 vehicle. Such wheeled Sosna together with Gibka-S on Tigr would be excellent for protection of convoys.



Talking about 57 mm gun, I would say T-15 is great. Strong armor, high power 57 mm gun with all arsenal of ammunition, laser guided and air burst included and 2 Ataka missiles.

Ataka missile is in the same level as Hellfire missile and guns are more powerful.

They come in command guided and laser beam riding models and would be a fraction of the price of a Hellfire missile to be honest.

I would expect smaller lighter missiles would be more use like the new Bulat laser beam riding missile where calibre is not so relevant as it wont be using a HEAT warhead and wont need to penetrate metres of steel armour.

The fundamental role of the BMPT is tank level protection but essentially with a boosted IFV or BMP level of fire power to basically engage everything a tank is not so efficient at engaging so the tanks can concentrate on enemy heavy armour.

In that regard the T-15 BMP is ideal.. except the rear troop compartment can be replaced with extra ammo and equipment.

The original BMPT type vehicles were air defence guns with eye watering fire power... twin 14.5mm HMGs to start with in the BTR-40 which was a fully anti air and anti ground system, followed by the BTR-152 with twin barrel 23mm cannon and of course ZSU-57-2 and ZSU-23-4 and then Tunguska.

I rather suspect the 30x165mm rounds are a bit overkill as were the 23 x 152mm rounds the Shilka and ZU-23-2 towed gun mount fired.

I think a twin barrel 23mm cannon as used in the chin turret of the newest Hind model might be more practical... enormous rate of fire so very short bursts can lob a cloud of HE projectiles at the target at once like a shotgun blast... the 23 x 115mm shells only leave the barrel at 700m/s so despite the enormous rate of fire the recoil is not excessive and a lot more rounds can be carried for the weapon... the effect on soft targets in the open would be devastating and shrapnel and fragments vastly more effective than a similar burst from rifle or HMG calibre rounds that don't explode.

The 57mm grenade launcher on the T-15 would be devastating and could take down enemy light armoured vehicles too with its APFSDS rounds as well, while its Kornet and Bulat missiles would allow all sorts of targets to be engaged too.

A rear turret bustle mounted cannon with say a 30mm cannon on one side and a twin barrel 23mm cannon on the other and perhaps a 40mm grenade launcher in the middle all able to independently elevate to engage targets at different ranges would be overkill excessive, but it would be useful to 4km with airburst 30mm cannon shells and the 23mm gun rounds are heavy and can be carried in enormous numbers, while the 40mm grenades are also compact and rather effective too.

The rear troop compartment could be filled with missiles and extra 57mm grenade ammo...

https://vpk.name/news/487719_gosispytaniya_umnyh_boepripasov_dlya_terminatorov_startuyut_v_aprele.html

АБУ-ДАБИ, 23 фев - РИА Новости. Госиспытания 30-миллиметровых боеприпасов с дистанционным подрывом для боевых машин поддержки танков "Терминатор" стартуют в апреле 2021 года, заявил РИА Новости гендиректор предприятия-разработчика этих снарядов НПО "Прибор" (входит в концерн "Техмаш") Юрий Набоков.

Таким образом сроки испытаний снарядов сдвинуты "вправо". Ранее Набоков заявлял РИА Новости, что они будут готовы к концу 2020 года.

"Снаряды для "Терминатора" выходят на госиспытания, фактически мы приступаем к ним по директиве с 1 апреля этого года. Думаю, что к концу следующего года боеприпасы с дистанционным подрывом будут готовы, мы закладываем на испытания где-то восемь - девять месяцев, затем предстоят формальные процедуры оформления документов", - сказал Набоков.

Боевая машина поддержки танков (БМПТ) "Терминатор" принята на вооружение Вооруженных сил России в 2018 году. Комплекс вооружений БМПТ состоит из двух 30-миллиметровых пушек 2А42, четырех противотанковых управляемых ракет 9М120-1 типа "Атака" с лазерной системой наведения, двух гранатометов АГС-17 и 7,62-миллиметрового модернизированного танкового пулемета Калашникова.

Первый контракт на поставку вооруженным силам России БМПТ "Терминатор" был подписан в ходе научно-технического форума "Армия-2017".

ABU DHABI, 23 Feb - RIA Novosti. State tests of 30-millimeter ammunition with remote detonation for Terminator tank support combat vehicles will start in April 2021, Yuri Nabokov, general director of the enterprise developer of these shells, NPO Pribor (part of the Tekhmash concern), told RIA Novosti.

Thus, the terms of testing the shells are shifted "to the right". Earlier, Nabokov told RIA Novosti that they would be ready by the end of 2020.

"The shells for the Terminator are going to state tests, in fact, we are starting them according to the directive from April 1 of this year. I think that by the end of next year, the ammunition with remote detonation will be ready, we are putting it on tests for about eight to nine months, then formal procedures for paperwork are coming, "Nabokov said.

The Terminator Tank Support Fighting Vehicle (BMPT) was adopted by the Russian Armed Forces in 2018. The BMPT armament complex consists of two 30-mm 2A42 cannons, four 9M120-1 anti-tank guided missiles of the Attack type with a laser guidance system, two AGS-17 grenade launchers and a 7.62-mm modernized Kalashnikov tank machine gun.

The first contract for the delivery of the Terminator BMPT to the Russian armed forces was signed during the Army-2017 scientific and technical forum.

In April will start state tests for air burst ammunition for 30 mm guns on BMPT. Considering, that Russian army now have a small number of BMPTs, they will most probably all be included in tests and they got big enough batch of new air burst ammunition, so BMPTs are now practically armed with them. Officially they will be accepted at the end of 2022. FCS in BMPT is the same as in BMD-4M, newer BMP-3 and BMP-2M Berezhok, so they will all be able to use this new air burst ammunition.

The ammo is so versatile I suspect all their Army and Navy and even Air Force platforms might receive such ammo... being able to command detonate your rounds near the target without needing direct contact with the target is something most users of cannons dream of.


Whether it is a group of terrorists hunkered down behind a stone wall where you see them clearly on the UAV video streaming of their position... aim slightly above the wall and fire a burst of high velocity 30mm cannon shells and set them off just as they cross the wall... the other option would be 30mm grenade launcher burst to land just past the wall but rounds exploding a few metres up in the air tend to create head and chest and upper body injuries, while rounds that explode on impact with the ground tend to be less lethal leg and lower body injuries.

I would think Tunguska units and Pantsir units would benefit greatly from air burst shells against drones and smaller targets like cruise missiles, but as I say even BMPs and BTRs with 30mm cannon would benefit against both ground and air targets with such ammo too.

Mass production in enormous volumes should make the price drop too... at sea having air burst rounds against drones and anti ship weapons would also have a significant effect because you no longer have to get a direct hit to damage the target... imagine the plight of the poor Pirate with a 20 round burst of 30mm cannon shells exploding above their little fizz boat shredding the boat and the pirates... or in air to air combat firing a burst at the enemy aircraft with rounds that don't hit directly still exploding and doing some damage instead of blowing past and creating danger for other units nearby.

For the BMPT.... a Javelin is detected so the BMPT turns its turret to where the missile came from and fires a burst of air detonating rounds... the Javelin operator though they were safe behind that wall... pop up... lock and launch and the drop back down out of line of sight... and you are safe... NOT.

Hell the Javelin missile is so slow you could probably take potshots to have a go at shooting it down too.

Tunguska and Pantsir use the same 30x165 mm round as 2A42 gun on BMPT, BMPs, etc. It is logical, that Tunguska and pantsir will be the main users of programable air burst rounds. For now, no reports about tests of that ammunition with Tunguska or Pantsir. But they could be included in state tests.

Both pantsir and tunguska would need a modernization to use such round.

Their FCS is meant to shoot a cloud of rounds at the target right now.

Air burst are not only good against airborne target :

Both pantsir and tunguska would need a modernization to use such round.

Their FCS is meant to shoot a cloud of rounds at the target right now.

Air burst are not only good against airborne target :

I would say the EO ball turrets mounted on the newest models of both already include a laser range finder and could incorporate a laser beam to detonate the rounds... both vehicles have tracking radars that could track outgoing rounds and the target and as they merge a laser beam command detonator should be fairly easy to send at the right time.

Both systems have coil muzzle systems measuring muzzle velocity in real time, so the bursts could be made much much shorter yet still be effective.

Meaning more targets could be engaged per load of ammo.

Some targets like armoured targets like Apaches would still require standard ammo, but lighter targets like drones would be shredded with airburst rounds.

magnumcromagnon wrote:

does the shaky 2A42 barrel introduce accuracy problems? I've also noticed this somewhat exaggerated gyration in other platforms that employ the 2A42 gun.