Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #2

franco wrote:New Arctic variant under testing;

http://mil.today/2017/Arctic1/

This will be based on the Kurganets, am I right?

Benya wrote:

franco wrote:New Arctic variant under testing;

http://mil.today/2017/Arctic1/

This will be based on the Kurganets, am I right?

I would suspect the new tracked BTR version.

GarryB wrote:The 57mm rifled guns can still use sabot rounds... they are just fitted with slip rings.

The new 57mm guns for IFVs in Russia are rifled because the HE rounds they fire benefit from spin stabilisation, while the HEAT anti armour rounds they will fire will likely be guided so rifling does not matter.

Because of the size of the round a good APHE round would be interesting for use against lighter vehicles and fortifications.

Making tank calibre guns smoothbore makes sense because APFSDS rounds don't like being spun and neither do HEAT rounds. The other rounds are guided missiles... which don't like being spun much eitehr, and HE rounds that can be fin stabilised.

For smaller calibres APFSDS rounds can have slip rings that prevent the rifling from spinning the projectile, but HE rounds benefit from spin stabilisation and guided shells will soon stop spinning when their control fins pop out after being fired.

Thank you so much, Garry. The 57mm gun will provide a very powerful boost to the offensive capabilities of Russia's AFVs. Why don't the other armies in the West put the Bofors 57mm or Italy's Oto Melara 60mm hypervelocity gun into service on their AFVs?

I assume that these guns can also use slip-rings.

Well if they are planning on fighting the Russians... and they seem to be, they will need an IFV gun that can penetrate a tank level of protection... which means a tank gun...

Might be a problem...

Of course the 57mm gun is intended to deal with 30-38 ton NATO IFVs and also be useful against anything smaller.

Should be interesting but I suspect the west will simply copy the Russians again... like they did with the BMP and smoothbore main tank guns assault rifles etc etc.

GarryB wrote:Well if they are planning on fighting the Russians... and they seem to be, they will need an IFV gun that can penetrate a tank level of protection... which means a tank gun...

Might be a problem...

Of course the 57mm gun is intended to deal with 30-38 ton NATO IFVs and also be useful against anything smaller.

Should be interesting but I suspect the west will simply copy the Russians again... like they did with the BMP and smoothbore main tank guns assault rifles etc etc.

I was actually surprised that virtually all of the features of the modern tank were invented by the Russians. ERA, Smooth-bore guns, passive and active defence sysems, GLATGM and more.

I never understood why a great deal of European States have allowed themselves to be deceived and recruited by the Anglo-American establishment to regard and treat Russia as a permanent enemy... as though it were not European. Even WWII documentaries present a tone that seems to bemoan the fact that the Russians prevailed in what was actually a death struggle. It's disgusting.

franco wrote:

Benya wrote:

franco wrote:New Arctic variant under testing;

http://mil.today/2017/Arctic1/

This will be based on the Kurganets, am I right?

I would suspect the new tracked BTR version.

Tracked vehicle in... snow?

Regular wrote:
Tracked vehicle in... snow?

Yeah, with wider tracks it would be possible. You know the DT-30 tracked vehicle? That was designed especially for arctic use.

franco wrote:
I would suspect the new tracked BTR version.

A tracked BTR? You mean the APC variant of the Kurganets armed with a 12,7mm Kord HMG?

Sorry, I meant to say, I thought tracked vehicles would be prefered over wheeled ones.
I can't imagine BTR doing better in snow then lets say MTLB

Benya wrote:

Regular wrote:
Tracked vehicle in... snow?

Yeah, with wider tracks it would be possible. You know the DT-30 tracked vehicle? That was designed especially for arctic use.

franco wrote:
I would suspect the new tracked BTR version.

A tracked BTR? You mean the APC variant of the Kurganets armed with a 12,7mm Kord HMG?

There are actually two tracked BTR or APC's in development. One based on the Kurganets and the other a development from the BMP-3 frame. Not sure which one for the Arctic other then the article stated it was 20 tonnes which sounds more like the Kurganets version.

Regular wrote:Sorry, I meant to say, I thought tracked vehicles would be prefered over wheeled ones.
I can't imagine BTR doing better in snow then lets say MTLB

The MTLB is actually a BTR by definition. There are actually two tracked APC's or BTR's in development presently to replace the MTLB.

AFAIK there will be heavy tracked units, Medium tracked units, medium wheeled units, and light wheeled units.

the tracked heavy units will have Armata based vehicles and there will be motor rifle and tank units... the same as now, with the only difference being the number of IFVs and BTRs in the motor rifle units being more than the tank units. the tank units having more tanks than IFVs and APCs. Both unit types will have tanks and troop transports.

The medium tracked units will have Kurganets based vehicles and will be tank and motor rifle units.

The medium wheeled units will have Boomerang based vehicles and the tank units will have a boomerang vehicle with a 125mm gun as a tank like platform plus IFV/APC vehicles, while the motor rifle medium wheeled units will have 125mm gun carrying "tanks" too.

The light wheeled units will be high mobility units and the "tank" vehicle might have a 57mm gun and Kornet missiless as a sort of gun platform vehicle but it will be a light highly mobile recon type force with high firepower and communications...

Existing types like the T-90 and BMP-3 and BMD-4 will continue to operate and continue to get upgrades and will likely continue to be exported.

So 57mm guns will be used for light brigades/divisions in bmpt role and also for ÀA to replace shilka/tungsten in light, medium and heavy divisions?

Out of curiosity why do apc continue to use 12.7mm ammo and not 23mm ammo...surely they have enough space for it and the autocannon shells support would be appreciated by infantry once they are out

MonkeymodelBananaRepublic wrote:So 57mm guns will be used for light brigades/divisions in bmpt role and also for ÀA to replace shilka/tungsten in light, medium and heavy divisions?

Out of curiosity why do apc continue to use 12.7mm ammo and not 23mm ammo...surely they have enough space for it and the autocannon shells support would be appreciated by infantry once they are out

1.) It looks like that the Russian Army will field the 57mm cannons in decent numbers, but not en masse. They decided to reintroduce it due to its versatility, that a 57mm shell can pack a bigger punch than a 30mm one, plus an AFV equipped with a 57mm gun has to carry less ammo than an other with a 30mm gun. Both guns have shells of similar muzzle velocities, but 57mm APDS-FS shells would have far more better armor penetration capabilities. Despite these facts, the 30mm shells cause much less collateral damage, and provide just adequate firepower in most situations, where 57mm shells would be just an overkill.

The most logical deployment scheme of Russian IFV guns would be ⅔ of 30mm gun-equipped IFVs and ⅓ of 57mm gun-equipped IFVs in each IFV units.

For example, in a platoon of 6 Kurganets-25 IFVs, 4 K-25s would have 30mm guns, while 2 K-25s would have 57mm autocannons operating with them to back them up in case of they are outgunned, or their 30mm guns are not enough.

2.) 23mm vs 12.7mm? Actually, nowadays only Shilkas and ZU-23-2s use 23mm caliber guns, so it is pretty much a dead caliber for mechanized troops. Regular BTR-80s/82s are equipped with 14.5mm, so if you are looking for a slight firepower upgrade for APCs between the 12.7mm and 23mm calibers, look no further than it.

APCs tend to use 14.5mm calibre weapons rather than 12.7mm.

The 14.5mm calibre is very similar to a 20mm cannon in the west except has better velocity for armour penetration, at the cost of a smaller HE payload.

The 23mm calibre round you are talking about I assume is the 23 x 115mm round used in aircraft fighter cannon (ie MiG-21/23/31) and the late model Hind gunships.

The 57mm is going to be the new IFV calibre because the standard IFV calibre needs to be able to penetrate equivalent vehicles... that is its purpose.

30mm isn't powerful enough to penetrate enemy IFVs, and the number of shells needed to be fired to hit a small aircraft target like a UAV is too high to be practical.

The 57mm offers the penetration to deal with new IFVs and guided shells to destroy small aerial targets with one or two shots.

The previous APC calibre was the 14.5mm weapon and there is potential to replace that with 23 x 115mm ammo because APCs are not intended to engage armoured enemies... just hit soft targets. An APFSDS round could still be developed in that calibre that would make it an interesting weapon for anti light armour use.

If the BMPT has a 6 barrel 23mm gatling to deal with ground targets and the Hind keeps its 23mm cannon then developing the 23mm round makes sense as it is a very compact round that would be useful in many roles, but I suspect the 30mm cannon turret we see on the Kurganets and Armata vehicles will end up being the APC turret... together with the little turret mounting the 12.7mm HMG as a compliment in a balanced loadout.

Yes i was thinking of the 23 x 115 ammo, very useful stuff. 

So it seems reasonable to speculate that in heavy, medium and light units this might be the following load out: 

Heavy unit:
Tank = 152mm gun
Apc/btr t = 30mm + 12.7mm
Ifv = 57mm 
AA = 57mm + missiles 
Bmpt = possibly 23mm but currently no information

Medium unit: 
Tank = 125mm
Apc = 30mm + 12.7mm
Ifv = 57mm
AA = 57mm + missiles
Bmpt = no info

Light unit:
Tank = 57mm
Apc = 30mm + 12.7mm
Ifv =57mm ? 
AA = 57mm + missiles
Bmpt = no info


In each unit the hravy, medium, light chassis will be developed into a full fleet of around 50 vehicle types/varients e.g mortar with 120mm, recon etc

MonkeymodelBananaRepublic wrote:Yes i was thinking of the 23 x 115 ammo, very useful stuff. 

So it seems reasonable to speculate that in heavy, medium and light units this might be the following load out: 


Light unit:
Tank = 57mm
Apc = 30mm + 12.7mm
Ifv =57mm ? 
AA = 57mm + missiles
Bmpt = no info


In each unit the hravy, medium, light chassis will be developed into a full fleet of around 50 vehicle types/variants e.g mortar with 120mm, recon etc

At over 25 tonnes, Bumerang and Kurganets should be heavy enough to be able to handle the 2A82-1M gun of the current Armata T-14. Perhaps with a modified muzzle break and adjusted turret/suspension to help reduce recoil and improve fire on the move. It should be able to carry the same amount of rounds ready to fire as the current T-14 (32 rounds including GLATGM?), which is plenty. Should the 2A82-1M prove to be a little too hot for the Boomerang, then there is always the 2A75 125mm gun used in Sprut SD.

I think that the 57mm is a versatile weapon, but its not a tank gun. I think a true light tank should still be equipped with a more powerful caliber for direct fire support against any possible armored target.

Perhaps the 120 mm 2A60 rifled gun/mortar could be used, with advanced guided munitions capable of accurate, long range indirect fire, as well as short-medium range direct anti-armor capabilities.

it would be awesome to see something like the BAKHCHA-U module, which instead uses the combination of 57mm/120mm, installed on a tracked platform. With the addition of the new grenade launcher or a 23mm chain gun in a remote weapon station, this should be able to provide support against most targets. The turret would have to be rather large to be able to house significant numbers of ammo for both 57mm and the 120mm mortar, and i doubt it would be a practical thing to accomplish. The potential firepower would be massive tho.

In each unit the hravy, medium, light chassis will be developed into a full fleet of around 50 vehicle types/varients e.g mortar with 120mm, recon etc

Agreed, but that raises some thorny issues.

The BMPT is a fire power vehicle able to operate with tanks (ie tank level armour and mobility) that can deal with non armoured targets... ie infantry ATGMs and infantry ambushes etc etc.

In the heavy unit all the vehicles have tank level armour and mobility so an IFV... which has weapons designed to deal with all sorts of targets up to and including tanks, with no troops and extra ammo in the troop compartment could be used as a BMPT.

Also based on the definition there can be no BMPT in the medium and light units as they wont have tank level armour.

At over 25 tonnes, Bumerang and Kurganets should be heavy enough to be able to handle the 2A82-1M gun of the current Armata T-14. Perhaps with a modified muzzle break and adjusted turret/suspension to help reduce recoil and improve fire on the move. It should be able to carry the same amount of rounds ready to fire as the current T-14 (32 rounds including GLATGM?), which is plenty. Should the 2A82-1M prove to be a little too hot for the Boomerang, then there is always the 2A75 125mm gun used in Sprut SD.

I think we all agree on that... but I think he means the Boomerang and Kurganets are medium vehicles. The Typhoon is the light vehicle and might be too light for a 125mm gun.

Equally it wont be facing heavy armoured opponents so a fast firing accurate long range 57mm gun might be more use to the "gun platform" of the Typhoon family.

BTW so often a tank is used in a situation where no enemy tanks are present in lots of operations... I suspect a BMPT would be a much more suitable substitute in such cases as a heavily armoured and well armed vehicle... a 120mm gun/mortar (medium pressure gun more HE than Armour piercing but able to fire missiles) and a grenade launcher and a 23mm gatling would be ideal in my opinion.

it would be awesome to see something like the BAKHCHA-U module, which instead uses the combination of 57mm/120mm, installed on a tracked platform. With the addition of the new grenade launcher or a 23mm chain gun in a remote weapon station, this should be able to provide support against most targets. The turret would have to be rather large to be able to house significant numbers of ammo for both 57mm and the 120mm mortar, and i doubt it would be a practical thing to accomplish. The potential firepower would be massive tho.

I would either go for 57mm high velocity gun or a 120mm gun/mortar but not both.

A 57mm hv gun plus Kornet missiles and a 40mm grenade launcher and mgs... or 120mm gun/mortar plus a 57mm grenade launcher and a 23mm twin barrel cannon (in place of the gatling)

I think the latter would be best for the role as the 57mm guns will already be carried by all the IFVs and SPAAGs anyway.

There will be no shortage of fire power...

Russia to launch production of new combat vehicles based on Kurganets-25 tracked chassis.

The serial production of military combat vehicles based on the Kurganets-25 medium tracked platform will begin in 2021, Russian Deputy Defense Minister Yuri Borisov said during a working trip to defense contractors in Volgograd in south Russia.


"The serial production will begin in 2021 but it does not mean that we have put it aside. We have some time to reveal all weaknesses, test them, hedge all technical risks connected with the adjustment of the engine, automatic gearbox and sights," Borisov said.

The Infantry Fighting Vehicle (BMP) variant on the Kurganets-25 chassis was unveiled at the Victory Day Parade on May 9, 2015. Currently the Kurganets-25 platform is available in IFV (Infantry Fighting Vehicle) , APC (Armoured Personnel Carrier) and ARV (Armoured Recovery Vehicle) configurations.

The Kurganets-25 platform is expected to serve as the basis for an armored personnel carrier, an armored recovery vehicle, the 120mm self-propelled gun and 57mm antiaircraft artillery system.

The Kurganets-25 BMP will take part this year to the Victory Day military parade on May 9, 2017 in the center of Moscow.

The Kurganets-25 BMP could replaced the BMP IFV family currently in use by the Russian armed forces. In January 2014, the Russian Ministry of Defense has announced that the Russian army ground forces plan to renew 70% of its fleet with new armoured and main battle tanks for 2020.

The Kurganets-25 BMP is equipped with an electrically powered unmanned turret mounted in the centre of the hull. The turret is armed with the 2A42 30mm automatic cannon. A 7.62mm coaxial PKT machine gun is mounted to the left side of the main armament. Two launchers of anti-tank guided missile Kornet-EM are mounted on each side of the turret.


Source: http://www.armyrecognition.com/weapons_defence_industry_military_technology_uk/russia_to_launch_production_of_new_combat_vehicles_based_on_kurganets-25_tracked_chassis_12804172.html

---

2021? Good estimate in my opinion. This will give more time to weapon system suppliers to develop new/upgrade current combat modules for the platform. For example, that mortar on the Floks mortar truck or the howitzer of the new Zauralets system, or the 57mm AU-220M autocannon, and many more weapon/sensor/signals/EW/radar equipment could be mounted on the Kurganets platform.

However, a LRIP* is likely to start in the next two years (2018-2019), so they would have enough vehicles of the platform to test and evaluate everything necessary capabilities and stuff.

*Low Rate Initial Production​ (LRIP)

They are developing suites for each vehicle type.

In other words the BMP or IFV vehicle will have a specific turret with specific sensors and weapons and equipment and will be fitted to all vehicle families... ie the BMP Armata will likely have a 57mm high velocity gun and missiles and grenade launchers... and so will the Boomerang BMP and the Kurganets BMP and the Typhoon BMP.

Obviously there are limitations... the 10-15 ton Typhoon might not have a 125mm gun armed MBT... it might instead have a 57mm gun armed gun platform, or might even have a 120mm gun/mortar armed gun vehicle. The 152mm calibre artillery model might instead have a 120mm rifled gun/mortar too.

Equally instead of Pantsir-SM versions of Typhoon there might be SOSNA-R versions of Typhoon...

The different types will be in development for all vehicle families... I would think that by 2021 they will have most vehicle types ready for initial production at least.

4 years from now?? i think its too long period.

George1 wrote:4 years from now?? i think its too long period.

Heads up George, we might see an initial batch of 50-100 vehicles, which would be produced for field testing.

The situation would be similar to the Armata's case. The Russian MoD ordered a hundred of them to be produced by 2018, and if both the MoD is satisfied with the results of the tests, they will approve its serial production. If not, it will be sent back to UVZ for some rework/fine tuning.

By the time they start proper serial production they will need to have at least 20 different vehicle base types ready for production.

I doubt they will start by producing Armata MBTs and replacing T-90s with these tanks, and producing Kurganets IFVs and replacing the BMPs with these vehicles.

It would be more logical to make Armata units and Kurganets units and boomerang units, which means you need all the various vehicle types ready for production to place an entire Armata division in service, or an entire Kurganets or Boomerang division in service too.

They will likely start with a testing force first and then start producing the vehicles to complete a div at a time after that.

I assume that these guns can also use slip-rings.

Well technically it is the ammo that has the slip rings.

I actually don't know if the new 57mm gun is a smoothbore or rifled.

For and IFV the primary rounds will be APFSDS and HEAT for use against Armour with a backup common round being guided missile.

None of these three types benefit from rifling.

But then for an AA gun HE rounds of the sensor fused type would benefit from spin stabilisation.

A smoothbore would make the barrel lighter and cheaper, and it will generate a higher muzzle velocity for a given length.

It is easier to clean too.

I don't think it makes sense to have two different types of gun and therefore two different types of ammo.

(smoothbore guns need fin stabilised rounds, while rifled rounds need slip rings and control fins for guided rounds)

Of course despite the apparent standardisation within the Russian and Soviet military the Air Force tends to use electric primed ammo, while the Army tends to use percussion primed rounds.

The resulting situation is that although on paper the 30 x 165mm round is standard in the Russian military a MiG-29 pilot could not land next to a BMP-3 unit and borrow some 30mm cannon ammo. It is the same for the Navy.... those 30mm gatlings use different ammo too.

George1 wrote:4 years from now?? i think its too long period.

an incredibly long one and completely foolish of Russia military.
They are already in a war in Syria and Ukraine ,how much worse things needs
to be for Russia government realize , they are already at war with NATO major
powers ,but now is done by proxy and without an official declaration.

Then Montenegro joins NATO and how long after that for a new war
to start in Serbia ? Russia is not really taking seriously the real problems they face in
the world. im afraid. it will be a matter of time , The west will start
another conflict forcing Russia to interfere. and those Armata tanks could make
a major different in human lives lost.