Russian Ground Forces: News #1

I think it is a case of economics.

If they buy BMD-3s then they wont have any money in the budget in 3 years time when everyone else will be getting Boomerang-10 and Boomerang-25 and Kyurganets-25 and Aramata.

I rather suspect this is an upgraded T-72 for 1/5th the price of a new T-90AM so the troops still get thermals and upgraded communications and navigations etc and battle management systems to practise with and learn to use, and when Armata becomes available they will have more money to buy the new vehicle in larger batches.

BTR-82 with the 30mm is supposedly not very accurate when firing anything more than single shots.

It might sound a little strange, but if you are firing bursts then you don't want extreme accuracy.

Against a manoeuvrable target firing a projectile that once it leaves the muzzle travels a fixed trajectory to impact you need a bit of spread of shots to ensure a kill.

There are plenty of videos on Youtube showing Tunguska or Kashtan shooting down aircraft and indeed drones where the camera follows the drone and all of a sudden a shower of tracer crosses the frame as the burst of shells travel past. It isn't a narrow beam of shells all following the exact same trajectory, it is a spread like a shotgun blast.

Very simply the BTR-82 is a bit light for the 30mm 2A72 cannon it carries, though its longer recoil stroke and lower rate of fire tend to make it more accurate than the 2A42, it also introduces less smoke into the vehicle when fired too.

Against aircraft or a group of enemy troops then a burst of fire needs a bit of spread to be effective.

The idea that the 30mm cannon is some sort of sniper weapon that will be used to target a certain part of an enemy armoured vehicle is a bit naive.

This is of because of the installation, a heavier turret, the 100mm paired gun as a stiffener, and tracked chassis. BTR-80 installation is much simper and you can see the gun spassing all over the place when burst firing.

The 30mm 2A72 on a BMP-3 has a shared mount with the 100mm rifled main gun which absorbs a lot of recoil. Add to that the extra mass in the turret and the vehicle itself and you answer your own question.

Short of having a recoil spade at the back like a self propelled artillery piece there is not a huge amount they can do.

Actually fitting the muzzle brake of the 2A42 on the 2A72 might help a little.

The irony is that the BMP-2 can't fire at its high rate of fire for any length of time because it fills the crew compartment with smoke. The longer recoil stroke of the 2A72 was not to improve accuracy but to keep the chamber closed for longer to reduce the smoke in the crew compartment.

The 30mm 2A72 is quite a powerful weapon for a vehicle that size.

Spetsnaz surround the building with the bad guys inside, shoot off a few rounds, fire off a few RPG's, kill a Haji or two, then the BTR comes in, takes down the building, and finishes the job. Am I right?

... close... it is usually an RPO that brings the house down...

@TR1... happens to the best of them...

I remember seeing a Pantsir-S1 video of a missile getting clear of the launcher and then just exploding about 50-100m from the launcher... no damage to the launcher, and quite impressive.

Just becomes a problem for the UXO team...

Yes, hard to see what sort of rocket it is but if it was an RPO-A they would be in serious trouble if it went off...

They seem to be transporting them by train to be shipped somewhere.

With the add on armour these vehicles would be pretty good for a smaller country that is not facing the latest and the bestest. The vast majority of low intensity conflicts that involve tanks rarely involve shooting at other tanks and largely revolve around surviving RPG attack and shooting HE shells directly into enemy strong points.

The T-62M is as good a platform for doing that as any other and cheaper than most... especially if it is used in a fixed position like protecting a fire base where a chain link fence can be set up around it to protect it from missiles and rockets.

Sounds a bit extreme using a tank for this sort of thing, but nothing concentrates enemy focus like a tank which would allow a clever strategist to hide other defences till an attack is launched and while the attack focuses on the tank you can hit them with something else they weren't expecting.

If they would like to donate a few select vehicles to my toy collection I can give them the location of my nearest port and details of overland transport options to my backyard...

Militaryparitet.com cited a blog citing Interfaks to the effect that Kurganmashzavod will not be asked to renew production of BMP-3s for the army despite earlier indications it would. The item notes the President’s polpred in the Urals saying the army has also declined to buy the BMD-4M.

I would expect they will upgrade existing vehicles and equipment with the electronics and night vision stuff needed to be able to practise their net centric stuff and train at night and in bad weather and save the extra money to buy new vehicles after 2015 when the Armata, Kurganets-25 and Boomerang-25/-10 become available.

It means they don't spend billions now on brand new items like BMP-3M and BMD-4M when new vehicles to replace them are in development and expected to be in production in a few years time.

Obviously they want to train in a net centric environment with new computers and comms and night vision equipment but it is much cheaper to instal that on existing vehicles rather than to buy brand new vehicles to get those features.

It comes down to cost... if a T-90AM costs 4 billion and a T-72 with upgrades to give it modern comms, night vision, new ammo, new battle management systems for 1.2 billion then it makes sense to spend less now so you have more in the budget when Armata becomes available.

Vzglyad citing Interfaks reported on Irkut’s president saying the company will make a combat version of the Yak-130 trainer. It will have greater thrust and be intended for Russia and for export.

I wonder if he means the single seat version... a mix of two seaters and single seaters would be quite useful for most air forces... a light cheap to buy and operate fighter for air policing duties would be ideal for many European countries that do not intend to invade anyone...

Chrisantema is not exactly brand new... it is the replacement for the Shturm/Ataka missiles on ground vehicles and soon on helos.

It has combined SARH and laser beam riding guidance options that allow a vehicle equipped with a MMW radar to mark targets with both radar and laser to guided two missiles at two different targets at once.

This is the website of the manufacturer:

http://www.kbm.ru/production/ptrk/35.html

Believed to be in service with Russia, Syria, and 3 vehicles in Libya.