Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #2

GarryB wrote: I rather suspect the use of Pantsir type missiles on a 57mm gun armed vehicle makes a lot of sense... with 20km range or 40km range missiles used against aircraft while the smaller 57mm guided shells could be used against cheap drones or incoming munitions like Hellfire or even Javelin...

if you define compact as of size of current Pantsir probably it woudl fit. Trading 4x30mmm and ammo ws 1x57mm you might be actually better off. The problem I see is stability of platform. Cannot imagine firing on move 57mm on vehicle with high gravity center while driving on bumpy terrain without stopping and securing platform.

And being able to uze gun in real time is crucial for moving columns.

GarryB wrote:
The talk is laser homing 57mm shells but I like the idea of simple command guided shells like the command guided Pantsir missiles... cheap and simple... the main question is can it be made compact enough to leave enough space for a decent HE payload...

I wish also to eat cake and have it Couple years ago on Gurhkan was published work of Russian 57mm research of guided ammo. Also for slow moving area targets. With more explosives vs less muzzle speed (700m/s vs. 1000 m/s) they got amount of explosives on level of 76mm gun. But this works for slow UAV/UACV or helos but not something fast. Probably burst 2-3 rounds with less explosives but higher speed projectiles is better solution.

GarryB wrote:
Having a vehicle with morfei and a 57mm gun would be an interesting turn of events... because it reverses the range capabilities of the current SPAAGAMSs...ie the missile will have a shorter range than the guns...  

and even worse...for a good reason - gun is to cheaply take down anything flying in range/height of about 10km envelope but...in case of massive attack many UCVs/AGTMs/helos even planes gun is has too little time to tak eit down in real time no tot mention barrel heating after continuous bursts for a minute or so...

The problem I see is stability of platform. Cannot imagine firing on move 57mm on vehicle with high gravity center while driving on bumpy terrain without stopping and securing platform.

With guided shells then extremely accurate stabilisation systems are not so important.

For land based targets high rate of fire is not important.

When driving across rough terrain the targets will likely be less than 4km away and guided shells would be able to deal with most target types easily enough even with one or two shots.

And being able to uze gun in real time is crucial for moving columns.

Few systems could do that currently.

The extended range of guided 57mm shells means even having to stop to fire a round would not be that big a deal as the high flight speed and extended range means actually a missile would still be better than a cannon shell as an SA-22 will hit a target at 20km before a 57mm shell would hit a target at 10km. The 57mm shell will likely leave the barrel at about 900m/s but the missile will achieve about 1.2km/s at about 1.5km range and its greater mass will allow it to push through the air much more efficiently than the smaller lighter 57mm shell.

I wish also to eat cake and have it Smile Couple years ago on Gurhkan was published work of Russian 57mm research of guided ammo. Also for slow moving area targets. With more explosives vs less muzzle speed (700m/s vs. 1000 m/s) they got amount of explosives on level of 76mm gun. But this works for slow UAV/UACV or helos but not something fast. Probably burst 2-3 rounds with less explosives but higher speed projectiles is better solution.

I disagree... it is not speed that ensures a hit.... it is guidance. The Americans think high velocity makes air to air cannon fire more effective with their 1km/s 20mm cannon rounds but the Soviets and Russians with their 700m/s 23mm cannons have much better performance.

1,000mps is the armour piercing 57mm rounds used for anti armour work... the HE shells with guidance will be much less dense and much lower velocity... simply because most of the cartridge case will be filled with projectile with little room for propellant.

and even worse...for a good reason - gun is to cheaply take down anything flying in range/height of about 10km envelope but...in case of massive attack many UCVs/AGTMs/helos even planes gun is has too little time to tak eit down in real time no tot mention barrel heating after continuous bursts for a minute or so...

The tunguska has a liquid cooling system for the barrels... I rather suspect any anti aircraft variant of the 57mm in land and sea based models will have a liquid cooling system fitted to allow excellent rates of fire.

The enemy will run out of drones before even one vehicle fires off its 150-200 shells.

Remember the guided shells will likely be effective to 12km or so, but even proximity fused unguided HE shells will be effective to 5-6km too against dumb straight flying UAVs.

We know that there is a unification of design with the SA-22 and the Hermes and that the latter has been shown in drawings based on a truck mount that looks very much like a Grad vehicle with 40 odd launch tubes.

Now if the 57mm gun based SPAAG has no room for missiles then it would make sense to have a gun vehicle able to control several missile launch vehicles around the place... with all the sensors and command and control systems mounted on the 57mm gun vehicle and lots of missile carrying trucks sitting around the place waiting for a launch command...

Of course that raises the question... why bother with a 57mm gun when a 125mm gun could fire a missile with a decent HE payload for an airborne target and have room for a scramjet motor and some fuel to fly at high speed all the way to the target at 15-20km range... but then who is to say they don't already have that for their MBTs...

GarryB wrote:

The problem I see is stability of platform. Cannot imagine firing on move 57mm on vehicle with high gravity center while driving on bumpy terrain without stopping and securing platform.

With guided shells then extremely accurate stabilisation systems are not so important.

For land based targets high rate of fire is not important.

We do not talk about moving on highway but bumpy terrain. I was talking about flipping over when you fire ...

GarryB wrote:

And being able to uze gun in real time is crucial for moving columns.

Few systems could do that currently.

The extended range of guided 57mm shells means even having to stop to fire a round would not be that big a deal as the high flight speed and extended range means actually a missile would still be better than a cannon shell as an SA-22 will hit a target at 20km before a 57mm shell would hit a target at 10km.  The 57mm shell will likely leave the barrel at about 900m/s but the missile will achieve about 1.2km/s at about 1.5km range and its greater mass will allow it to push through the air much more efficiently than the smaller lighter 57mm shell.

Yes you can but why if 57mm round is by 2orders of magnitude cheaper then the missile. But "instant" ability to shoot is one of huge advsnteges of gun system.

GarryB wrote:
I disagree... it is not speed that ensures a hit.... it is guidance. The Americans think high velocity makes air to air cannon fire more effective with their 1km/s 20mm cannon rounds but the Soviets and Russians with their 700m/s 23mm cannons have much better performance.

but no low velocity guns were used in AA role for a reason. Targets do change trajectory so th sooner projectile reach them the bigger chance thye can be hit.

GarryB wrote:

and even worse...for a good reason - gun is to cheaply take down anything flying in range/height of about 10km envelope but...in case of massive attack many UCVs/AGTMs/helos even planes gun is has too little time to tak eit down in real time no tot mention barrel heating after continuous bursts for a minute or so...

The tunguska has a liquid cooling system for the barrels... I rather suspect any anti aircraft variant of the 57mm in land and sea based models will have a liquid cooling system fitted to allow excellent rates of fire.

The enemy will run out of drones before even one vehicle fires off its 150-200 shells.

but 80 only is shoot ready in Biakal module...Water cooling so far not used in salf-propelled variants but can help to sustain good practical rate of fire though.

GarryB wrote:
Remember the guided shells will likely be effective to 12km or so, but even proximity fused unguided HE shells will be effective to 5-6km too against dumb straight flying UAVs.

For now, drones wil become much smarter soon and will start use hive tactics.

GarryB wrote:
Of course that raises the question... why bother with a 57mm gun when a 125mm gun could fire a missile with a decent HE payload for an airborne target and have room for a scramjet motor and some fuel to fly at high speed all the way to the target at 15-20km range... but then who is to say they don't already have that for their MBTs...

If you believe guided projectile flies like AA short range 30g menuvering missile then yes 125mm can replace 57mm in this role. otherwise 1000m/s+ Vo, 200rds/sec with large drum of ammo with 30% of weight, gun is much much better alternaive

The selection of 57 mm as the main unified caliber for future ground forces medium caliber cannons is the first serious attempt, since at least 4 decades, to gain a strong, reliable and unilateral "advantage" in the everlasting battle between tactical CAS vehicles ,tactical airborne ISR assets and organic elements (not directly AD related) of mechanized and armoured ground divisions.


57 mm round, in theirs modern iteration, in facts do not allow only to achieve an unmatched level of efficiency - in terms of range of engagement, flexibility, lethality and reliability - against practically all kind of foreseeable battlefield menaces ,being them ground or air based, but allow also already from day one to render practically obsolete and/or unsurvivable entire class of weapons (in particular the main air to ground tactical missile of likely opponents, in the shape of all iteration of AGM-114 mounted today on fixed wing/rotary wing/UAV platforms, and gliding bombs of almost all type) and theirs delivering platforms.


Just to render more clear what just said is sufficient to say that the initial, most basic, version of modern domestic 57 mm autocannon will widely outrange ....for remain silent on the crushingly lopsided economical and time of production match-up.... not only all versions of AGM-114 but even the future JAGM up to its increment 2 ,planned for introduction not earlier than half of next decade !

The central point of this "imbalance" is even more related to the fact that a 57 mm burst achieve same or better result against the grouind target against which are usually employed those missiles or bombs but will also allow to destroy helicopters, dispersed infantry, UAV/UCAV, glide and corrected bombs, low flying aircraft, cruise missiles etc...

Moreover to the contrary to what appened in the past ,where the field remained substantially plain because was possible to integrate the same gun caliber also in CAS aircraft and helicopters - at example the 30 mm autogun was integrated in CAS aircraft ,as in the A-10 and Su-25, literally building the aircraft around it, in order to render compatible the enormous recoil of those autogun with theirs frail aerodynamic equilibrium - it will be impossible to implement 57 mm cannon on helicopters, fixed wing aircraft or UCAV.

The Kurganets-25 is a tracked modular platform that will be used as a basis to build new types of infantry fighting vehicles and armored personnel carriers.

MOSCOW (Sputnik) – The Kurganets-25 platform can carry a crew of three and eight personnel. It is a fully amphibious vehicle, travelling at a speed of over 6 miles per hour in the water.

The Kurganets-25 platform can be fitted with a 30mm automatic cannon, a 7.62mm machine gun and four Kornet anti-tank guided missile launchers.

The first combat-ready vehicles are set to be produced by 2020 as only prototypes have been displayed so far.



Explains the decision to continue producing the BMP-3 until then.

Also is the production start date for the Boomerang still 2018?

franco wrote:The Kurganets-25 is a tracked modular platform that will be used as a basis to build new types of infantry fighting vehicles and armored personnel carriers.

MOSCOW (Sputnik) – The Kurganets-25 platform can carry a crew of three and eight personnel. It is a fully amphibious vehicle, travelling at a speed of over 6 miles per hour in the water.

The Kurganets-25 platform can be fitted with a 30mm automatic cannon, a 7.62mm machine gun and four Kornet anti-tank guided missile launchers.

The first combat-ready vehicles are set to be produced by 2020 as only prototypes have been displayed so far.



Explains the decision to continue producing the BMP-3 until then.

Also is the production start date for the Boomerang still 2018?

I wonder why it will take that long to get it into service? Maybe the design is not yet perfected? Engines/parts will not be localized until the said date etc?

We do not talk about moving on highway but bumpy terrain. I was talking about flipping over when you fire ...

I would suggest the recoil management for the gun would deal with that risk... if teh 18 ton Sprut doesn't roll over when firing its 125mm gun then I think firing a 57mm gun should be rather safer.

Of course I have seen slow motion footage of a Sprut firing its main gun and it jumps quite a bit at the front of the vehicle, though not until the round is well on its way...

Yes you can but why if 57mm round is by 2orders of magnitude cheaper then the missile. But "instant" ability to shoot is one of huge advsnteges of gun system.

Current models of TOR and Pantsir can fire while moving, but very few other vehicles I have ever heard of can do the same. Even Shilka can fire on the move... but with reduced accuracy.

The point is that with guided shells precise accuracy with the first shot is not important any more... any inaccuracy can be compensated for in flight with the guidance system, so even firing at a very low rate of fire while on the move... say one shot every 3-4 seconds will be more than enough to deal with a range of threats... with optics and radar stabilisation... guidance accuracy should not reduce much at all.

but no low velocity guns were used in AA role for a reason. Targets do change trajectory so th sooner projectile reach them the bigger chance thye can be hit.

Actually that is why no large calibre guns are used in the AA role by modern armies because even if the aiming is perfect the flight time of the shell means that the target area will be a box of space and not a point in space. The more the target turns or speeds up or slows down the bigger the box. The 23mm and 30mm cannon got their effectiveness by firing 100-200 rounds and the recoil and distance meant those rounds were evenly spread around the point of aim effectively filling that box with potential killers. To hit a smaller target requires rather more rounds... 500-1,000 for a cruise missile or small drone which is totally impractical.

The solution is a guided shell and because that solution can compensate for the manouvers of the target and for small targets then velocity stops being important.

In the IFV role of course the velocity is important for penetration, but with guided shells actually hitting the target relies on being aimed ahead of the target for a proper intercept and enough manover capability to be able to hit the target big or small in the time allowed.

Velocity for the guided shell becomes unimportant except that it needs forward velocity to close range on the target.

but 80 only is shoot ready in Biakal module...Water cooling so far not used in salf-propelled variants but can help to sustain good practical rate of fire though.

Like I said Baikal model is IFV turret... it is limited because its primary role is troop transport so the rear of the vehicle can't have more ammo it needs to carry troops.

The anti aircraft model will have the rear of the hull to store more ammo. And being a dedicated air defence vehicle it will have other modifications like air search radar and tracking radar and optics optimised for tracking aerial targets and of course water cooled barrels like on Tunguska and Shilka.

For now, drones wil become much smarter soon and will start use hive tactics.

Yeah... and 57mm shells can become much more dangerous when the HE warheads are replaced with EMP warheads that disable drones from 50 metres... one shell going off within a swarm and its all over.

Small targets like little drones means 30mm shells become useless because the density needed of shells to hit small targets means too many shells need to be fired at one time just to hit one target.

If you believe guided projectile flies like AA short range 30g menuvering missile then yes 125mm can replace 57mm in this role. otherwise 1000m/s+ Vo, 200rds/sec with large drum of ammo with 30% of weight, gun is much much better alternaive

Yeah... the thing is that to get a drone to pull 30 gs at the right moment to evade incoming cannon fire it would need some sort of sensor to detect the incoming rounds... so you can pretty much make your outgoing rounds detect the radar sensors or laser sensors that are used to detect ground fire to destroy the drones.

The outgoing shells don't need to pull 30gs... they just need warheads with directional warheads that explode towards the target fired by proximity fuse or command based on data collected by the firing vehicle... which can have much more powerful and precise sensors than anything fitted to either a missile or a drone or a guided shell.

I wonder why it will take that long to get it into service? Maybe the design is not yet perfected? Engines/parts will not be localized until the said date etc?

I suspect getting all the features and capabilities they demand of such a vehicle makes the lighter vehicles rather more demanding than the heavier ones.

It is also important to point out that the entire families of these vehicles need to be developed and produced... there is unification of systems and sensors and weapons where possible... ie the armata will have a 152mm self propelled artillery version called Coalition, but I doubt Boomerang will have a 152mm artillery vehicle.

To keep the vehicle families pure I suspect a truck based on transmission and engine etc etc for each vehicle family which might include artillery... tube and rocket for boomerang and typhoon.

I also suspect sanctions will mean all Russian transmissions and components including radar and EO systems...

franco wrote:The Kurganets-25 is a tracked modular platform that will be used as a basis to build new types of infantry fighting vehicles and armored personnel carriers.

MOSCOW (Sputnik) – The Kurganets-25 platform can carry a crew of three and eight personnel. It is a fully amphibious vehicle, travelling at a speed of over 6 miles per hour in the water.

The Kurganets-25 platform can be fitted with a 30mm automatic cannon, a 7.62mm machine gun and four Kornet anti-tank guided missile launchers.

The first combat-ready vehicles are set to be produced by 2020 as only prototypes have been displayed so far.



Explains the decision to continue producing the BMP-3 until then.

Also is the production start date for the Boomerang still 2018?

Well, according to TASS, the Russian Ministry of Defense ordered 200 BMP-3s in 2015 so far, and it's very unlikely to order more due to the planned shift of production capacity to the Kurganets APCs/IFVs., so the Kurganets' production will likely to begin in mid/late 2017, or early/mid 2018. The procurements of new BMP-3s are started in last year (2015), and are likely to end in (2017)

As for the Boomerang, its preliminary tests by the army/MoD are likely to be end this year, so serial production can start in 2017 in the Arzamas Machine Building Plant (Arzamas, Novgorod region), the same factory that produced the older BTRs.

TASS article about the BMP-3 order:

http://tass.ru/en/defense/819772

also TASS article about the start of Kurganets production:

http://tass.ru/en/russia/793643

Keep in mind that the Kurganets-25 IFV model is not the only vehicle replacing the BMP-3... all the IFV models of new vehicles are replacing the BMP-3.

That means the IFV version of Armata and Kurganets and Boomerang and Typhoon is replacing the BMP-3 as an IFV in the various different units.

Note the IFV sensor and weapon suite has been developed and largely standardised amongst the different vehicles, though of course the Typhoon MBT might have a 57mm gun instead of a 125mm gun, and of course the Armata version MBT might eventually get a larger calibre main gun than the 125mm gun too.

GarryB wrote:Keep in mind that the Kurganets-25 IFV model is not the only vehicle replacing the BMP-3... all the IFV models of new vehicles are replacing the BMP-3.

That means the IFV version of Armata and Kurganets and Boomerang and Typhoon is replacing the BMP-3 as an IFV in the various different units.

Note the IFV sensor and weapon suite has been developed and largely standardised amongst the different vehicles, though of course the Typhoon MBT might have a 57mm gun instead of a 125mm gun, and of course the Armata version MBT might eventually get a larger calibre main gun than the 125mm gun too.

Typhoon MBT???

I think that a 7.62 or 12.7 MG mm mounted on an RCWS is just enough for the Typhoon.

I agree... the Typhoon family is a light recon unit type vehicle family so the concept of MBT does not really apply.

Even the Sprut concept of light tank is too heavy for a typhoon based gun platform... Sprut would be a Boomerang level vehicle.

The Typhoon family gun platform would probably have a 57mm main gun and be very light and highly mobile including air dropping capability.

Apart from recon units I would suspect the main users of the Typhoon family vehicles will be in low intensity COIN type missions where paramilitary forces would be used normally.

The bulk of the Russian Army in my opinion will be mostly Kurganets and Boomerang based... with the former having better tactical mobility in places where roading is poor while the latter having better strategic mobility being better able to operate on roads in places in Europe where roads are good quality.

Latest article about the Boomerang platform

Russian land and naval forces will receive armoured vehicles derived from the Bumerang platform.

The Russian Army and Marine Corps may receive armored vehicles derived from the Bumerang commonized armored wheeled chassis, according to the Izvestia daily. The Military Industrial Company (VPK), which is the major manufacturer of armored personnel carriers (APC), infantry fighting vehicles (IFV) and armored cars for the Russian Armed Forces, has started the preliminary tests of an amphibious APC derived from the Bumerang.

The Russian Army and Marine Corps may receive armored vehicles derived from the Bumerang commonized armored wheeled chassis, according to the Izvestia daily. The Military Industrial Company (VPK), which is the major manufacturer of armored personnel carriers (APC), infantry fighting vehicles (IFV) and armored cars for the Russian Armed Forces, has started the preliminary tests of an amphibious APC derived from the Bumerang.



The K-17 Bumerang is an IFV (Infantry Fighting Vehicle) fitted with a an electrically powered unmanned turret mounted in the centre of the hull. The turret is armed with the 2A42 30mm automatic cannon.

According to Sergei Suvorov, spokesman for VPK LLC, the Bumerang will be a quantum leap in Soviet and Russian wheeled APC development, because it will be based on a common combat platform fit for use by both the Army and Marines. As was reported in the press, the advanced wheeled APC is slated for service entry in 2017.

"Eight wheels are the only thing the Bumerang and in-service BTR-80 and BTR-82 armored personnel carriers have in common," Suvorov said. "In other respects, the Bumerang is an utterly different commonized platform designed for the inventories of the Army and Navy - the latter’s Marine Corps in particular."

According to Suvorov, a problem of the BTR-80 family is its relatively low protection against landmines and improvised explosive devices. Therefore, troops prefer to ride the APCs on top, rather than inside. The low mine protection was among the causes of the advanced APC’s development. The Bumerang was unveiled to the public on May 9, 2015. Its key feature is modularity, i.e. the ability to spawn a whole family of combat vehicles based on the same chassis. The Bumerang’s derivatives include the K-16 APC and K-17 IFV. This allows the platform to be offered to virtually any Russian uniformed service, be it the Army, National Guard or Marines.

The Russian Army and Marine Corps may receive armored vehicles derived from the Bumerang commonized armored wheeled chassis, according to the Izvestia daily. The Military Industrial Company (VPK), which is the major manufacturer of armored personnel carriers (APC), infantry fighting vehicles (IFV) and armored cars for the Russian Armed Forces, has started the preliminary tests of an amphibious APC derived from the Bumerang.



The K-16 Bumerang is an APC (Armoured Personnel Carrier) fitted with a small unmanned turret armed with a 12.7 mm heavy machine gun.

Expert Victor Murakhovsky says the Marines are like the Paras - a rapid reaction force. Under the plans drawn up in 2015, the Marines were to take delivery of T-90 tanks, BMP-3 IFVs, BTR-82A APCs, BRDM-3 armored scout vehicles, 120-mm 2S31 Vena self-propelled artillery systems, upgraded air defense weapons, small arms, rocket launchers and automatic grenade launchers. Of the whole of this arsenal, however, only the BTR-82A can fully handle the amphibious assault on an austere beachhead. The expert explained that the Marines had asked for a dedicated combat vehicle to be developed as a replacement for their classical APC, but this has not been done due to the defense budget reduction.

The military is a stickler to the commonality and modularity of its armor. Therefore, the Bumerang may be regarded as a tradeoff between the seaworthiness of an amphibious assault vehicle and an enhanced firepower, say, by means of unmanned automated fighting modules.

The most promising of automated fighting modules is the Baikal. It packs a 57-mm automatic gun with a maximum rate of fire of 120 rd./min., an ammunition load of 200 rd. and a range of 12 km.

The 57-mm caliber is the most versatile one these days. It is more than the 30 mm of the BTR-82A’s gun, but less than the 100 mm of the main armament of the BMP-3 IFV. The Bumerang features higher wet gap crossing capability, ground agility and crew protection. For the first time, a Russian APC has its engine compartment in the bow of the hull. The solution has both increased the crew protection and enlarged the troop compartment. The troops embark and disembark through the rear door with the ramp now. This sets the vehicle apart from the Soviet-built APCs that the troops had to exit via side doors, according to the Izvestia daily.

Link to the article: http://www.armyrecognition.com/weapons_defence_industry_military_technology_uk/russian_land_and_naval_forces_will_receive_armourd_vehicles_derived_from_the_bumerang_platform_12807162.html

The 57-mm caliber is the most versatile one these days. It is more than the 30 mm of the BTR-82A’s gun, but less than the 100 mm of the main armament of the BMP-3 IFV. The Bumerang features higher wet gap crossing capability, ground agility and crew protection. For the first time, a Russian APC has its engine compartment in the bow of the hull. The solution has both increased the crew protection and enlarged the troop compartment. The troops embark and disembark through the rear door with the ramp now. This sets the vehicle apart from the Soviet-built APCs that the troops had to exit via side doors, according to the Izvestia daily.

The 57mm gun is certainly more powerful than the 30mm cannon, but in many ways will also be better than the 100mm gun of the BMP-3 in that the 100mm gun has a range limit of 7km and is really only a HE shell lobber and can carry 8 guided missiles.

In comparison the 57mm gun can carry up to 200 shells with good punch to 12km with guided rounds and HE and APFSDS rounds as options making it more flexible than the 100mm.

Also the Boomerang is NOT the first Soviet APC with a front mounted engine... BMP-1, BMP-2, BTR-40, BTR_152, BTR-50 all had front mounted engines. Only the wheeled BTR-60/70/80/82/90 have rear mounted engines and the BMP-3 IFV.

Fresh pics of Boomerang with some additional features

PapaDragon wrote:
Fresh pics of Boomerang with some additional features

I just mentioned the magnetic countermeasure suite in the armata thread.

I wonder why the EM trawl doesn't extend as far back on the 12.7mm version.

One more. Nice hatch cover/windscreen, I've been wondering if they will get those.

What are those ? Will there be an APS installed ?

calripson wrote:What are those ? Will there be an APS installed ?

Well, we don't know it exactly, but for the IFV variant, it would make sense to be installed.

Some more info on these "new" Boomerangs

New version of Russian K-16 and K-17 Bumerang were unveiled during military parade in Smolino.

During a military parade for the 75th anniversary of Russian Ministry of Defense scientific-testing experimental artillery range in Smolino (Nizhny Novgorod region),Russia, a new prototype version of the K-16 APC and K-17 BTR Bumerang armoured vehicles were presented to the public.



New version of the Russian-made K-17 BMP Bumerang at military parade in Smolino, Russia.

There is some change in the design, a new hatch or storage box is located in the center of the wheeled driveline.

The Boomerang was showed for the first time to the public during the rehearsal of Victory Day military parade in Alabino testing range, near Moscow in April 2015. The Bumerang is a new development of 8x8 armoured vehicle personnel carrier launched by the Russian defense industry to replace the old BTR family used by the Russian armed forces.

There is two variants of the Bumerang vehicle, the K-16 APC and K-17 IFV. The K-16 is an APC (Armoured Personnel Carrier) fitted with a small turret armed with 12.7mm heavy machine gun.

The K-17 is the IFV (Infantry Fighting Vehicle) version in the Bumerang family. The vehicle is fitted with a remotely controlled weapon station armed with one 2A42 30mm automatic cannon. Two launchers of anti-tank guided missile Kornet-EM are mounted on each side of the turret. The Bumerang can engage all mobile or static targets by day and night at a maximum range of 5,500m.

This new version of the K-17 Bumerang seems to be fitted with new sensors mounted at the front on each side of the hull.



New version of the Russian-made K-16 APC Bumerang at military parade in Smolino, Russia.

Link to the official article:
http://www.armyrecognition.com/august_2016_global_defense_security_news_industry/new_version_of_russian_k-16_and_k-17_bumerang_were_unveiled_during_military_parade_in_smolino_10208162.html

---

It is strange however that they didn't mentioned those APS(?) and smoke grenade launchers on the back of the vehicle that robognus have been posted a picture of.

Benya wrote:Some more info on these "new" Boomerangs

New version of Russian K-16 and K-17 Bumerang were unveiled during military parade in Smolino.

During a military parade for the 75th anniversary of Russian Ministry of Defense scientific-testing experimental artillery range in Smolino (Nizhny Novgorod region),Russia, a new prototype version of the K-16 APC and K-17 BTR Bumerang armoured vehicles were presented to the public.



New version of the Russian-made K-17 BMP Bumerang at military parade in Smolino, Russia.

There is some change in the design, a new hatch or storage box is located in the center of the wheeled driveline.

The Boomerang was showed for the first time to the public during the rehearsal of Victory Day military parade in Alabino testing range, near Moscow in April 2015. The Bumerang is a new development of 8x8 armoured vehicle personnel carrier launched by the Russian defense industry to replace the old BTR family used by the Russian armed forces.

There is two variants of the Bumerang vehicle, the K-16 APC and K-17 IFV. The K-16 is an APC (Armoured Personnel Carrier) fitted with a small turret armed with 12.7mm heavy machine gun.

The K-17 is the IFV (Infantry Fighting Vehicle) version in the Bumerang family. The vehicle is fitted with a remotely controlled weapon station armed with one 2A42 30mm automatic cannon. Two launchers of anti-tank guided missile Kornet-EM are mounted on each side of the turret. The Bumerang can engage all mobile or static targets by day and night at a maximum range of 5,500m.

This new version of the K-17 Bumerang seems to be fitted with new sensors mounted at the front on each side of the hull.



New version of the Russian-made K-16 APC Bumerang at military parade in Smolino, Russia.

Link to the official article:
http://www.armyrecognition.com/august_2016_global_defense_security_news_industry/new_version_of_russian_k-16_and_k-17_bumerang_were_unveiled_during_military_parade_in_smolino_10208162.html

---

It is strange however that they didn't mentioned those APS(?) and smoke grenade launchers on the back of the vehicle that robognus have been posted a picture of.

It's not the most accurate article, for example Russia wouldn't be using a export version of a domestic ATGM, and vehicle based version of Kornet would have a Thermobaric/HE-FRAG warheads with 10 km range and HEAT warheads with 8.5 km range.

New video about the Boomerang by Polit Russia:

The full article about the Kurganets ARV

---

Russian MoD has begun testing new armoured recovery vehicle based on Kurganets-25 chassis

Russia's Ministry of Defense and the "Special Design Bureau for Machine Building" (SKBM) have begun testing a next-generation Armored Recovery Vehicle (ARV) based on the Kurganets-25, which is used to repair or recover damaged combat machinery during warfare.


The new ARV has been developed on the platform of the Kurganets-25 infantry vehicle, and is intended to support infantry vehicles or armored personnel carriers. It carries repair equipment such as replacement engines, transmission systems, clutches and other necessary components, and is able to withstand heavy gunfire.

"The vehicle is currently undergoing testing at the moment, and it can be expected to be deployed together with the Kurganets-25," Sergey Abdulov, head designer at SKBM, told Izvestiya. Abdulov explained that the new vehicle is safer than its predecessors, and boasts an improved system of evacuation for soldiers under fire.

The new Kurganets-25 ARV improves upon the BREM-1 armored recovery vehicle which entered service with the Russina army in 1984.

A military source told the newspaper that the ARV will be deployed to support infantry and marine battalions equipped with the new Kurganets-25 and Bumerang combat vehicles, as well as the older BTR-80, BTR-82B, BMP-2 and BMP-3.

Source:
http://www.armyrecognition.com/weapons_defence_industry_military_technology_uk/russian_mod_has_begun_testing_new_armoured_recovery_vehicle_based_on_kurganets-25_chassis_10509161.html

---

BTW I expected this to be shown at Army-2016 , but maybe next year at Russia Arms Expo 2017, or Army-2017

Kubinka (Moscow Region), September 9 - RIA Novosti. Russian Defense Ministry does not consider it necessary to develop a wheeled tank, but if such a task is set - "defense industry" to cope with it, said in an interview with RIA Novosti head of the Main Tank-Automotive Management Office, Lieutenant-General Alexander Shevchenko.
The Defense Ministry told about the "highlight" of the new tank "Armata"
"Each machine comes against the background of the requirements, and the requirements specified forms and methods of military equipment if such a machine will need, I have no doubt that our tank builders do it.", - Said Shevchenko.

The general said that in the short term before GABTU such problems are not worth it, "but if they come, then we will make it, because we have a very good achievements."

He said that overseas wheeled tanks have only in the armies of the two countries - the United States and Italy.

"The Americans have a problem with this machine, the greatest success achieved Italians we their car were studied:. The creation of a wheeled tank - it is a very high-tech process is necessary to solve the problems of firepower and suspension - it is not all that simple In addition, these machines have a rather narrow.. scope, "- said the general.

See this is how disinformation is easily spread... a video claiming they are working on a wheeled tank and then some source saying they are not...

Kurganets and Boomerang will get a new heart

---

Russia's Kurganets-25 and Bumerang infantry fighting vehicles to get new diesel engines

The newest Kurganets-25 and Bumerang (Boomerang) infantry fighting vehicles (IFV) developed by the Tractor Plants Concern and the Military Industrial Company, respectively will get new diesel engines, according to a source in the Russian defense industry.


"The YaMZ-780 diesel engine developed by the Yaroslavl Motor-Building Plant [a subsidiary of the GAZ Group] has already been installed on the Kurganets-25 IFV. At present, the updated vehicle is successfully passing the relevant trials. We have tested YaMZ-780 at the test rig, and the engine has confirmed its highest performance. The maneuver capabilities of the Kurganets-25 IFVs will be increased in a drastic manner," the source said. He did not specify the terms of the works. The BMP-2 and BMP-3 IFVs are powered by UTD20S1 (300 h.p.) and UTD29 (500 h.p.) diesel engines, he reminded.

The source added that the original power output of the YaMZ-780 engine (1,000 h.p.) had been intentionally reduced in order to meet the terms of reference issued by the Russian Ministry of Defense (MoD). "The Yaroslavl Motor-Building Plant has reduced the YaMZ-780 power output upon the MoD`s requests. It can be increased to 900-1,100 h.p. any day of the week. We have integrated a backup control system, a backup air start system, and a preheater with the motor in order to shore up its reliability," the source said.

The YaMZ-780 6-cylinder diesel engine was unveiled at the Army 2016 military-technical forum held outside Moscow in September 2016. According to the official specifications provided by the Yaroslavl Motor-Building Plant, it has a liter capacity of 12.6 l, a rated power output of 750 h.p., a rated engine speed of 2,300 rpm, a maximum torque of 260 kgf/m, a speed at maximum torque of 1,600 rpm, a specific fuel consumption of 165 g/hr/h.p., a base weight of 1,050 kg, a length of 1,274 mm, a width of 850 mm, a height of 1,334 mm, and a service life of 2,500 hours. The YaMZ-780 diesel engine is intended for cross-country vehicles.

Source: http://www.armyrecognition.com/september_2016_global_defense_security_news_industry/russia_s_kurganets-25_and_bumerang_infantry_fighting_vehicles_to_get_new_diesel_engines_22009163_tass.html

---

Nothing special, the Russians are just keeping the tradition. Back in World War 2, the Russian tanks used diesel engines, while the Germans were used petrol engines, and the Russian ones were more fuel efficient than the German "gas-guzzling monsters". Of course, we are talking about APC/IFV engines, and western adversaries are using diesel engines too. BTW it is nice to see some technical parameters.