Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #2

They already use vehicle families to reduce the number of different types of vehicles in use, the current development of three vehicle families is intended to replace all existing vehicles.

It would make no sense having a Boomerang family force that is highly mobile and fully amphibious but has to drive slow so the Armata tanks can keep pace and can only cross at fords or bridges that can take a 55 ton vehicle.

They are not going to introduce 27 versions of all four of the vehicle families... the light weight typhoon family almost certainly doesn't have a 125mm tank gun armed gun vehicle... maybe a 57mm gun armed vehicle but certainly not 125mm smoothbore or 152mm artillery vehicle.

These new vehicles will be introduced and new variants also introduced to replace other vehicles in the formation in a cascade most likely... where a force that will eventually become a medium wheeled force will have its BMPs and BTRs replaced with Boomerangs... K-17 for the BMPs and K-16 for the BTRs... for the time being the MBTs in that formation will continue to be T-90s until the Boomerang T-14 variant is ready for testing and use.

For a heavy Armata division then the T-14 will replace the MBTs and the T-15 the BMPs, while the BREM engineer vehicles will be replaced with the T-16 engineer vehicle.

The tanks and BMPs and BTRs being replaced will be sent to units with older models and their vehicles will cascade so that the oldest model vehicles will be removed from service as the new vehicles enter service then other vehicles will be replaced.

The systems will be unified so the T-14 gear for the MBT will be the same with the same turret on the Kurganets and Boomerang models... as I said I don't think there will be a Typhoon light version but with other vehicles and types they could have similar vehicles.

For a very light Typhoon unit the gun platform might have a 57mm gun for instance.

The Polish jackass Damian, the Abrams fanboy who Mindstorm shoved his boot so far up his arse he was dry-heaving his bootlaces for a week, and was driven off the forum...had this to say about the parade version of K-25:

Funny that it needs these bouyancy side modules to be poperly amphibious, and do not have spaced armor in the front. Polish Borsuk is definately a better design in regards of both amphibious capability and front armor protection.

https://twitter.com/DRatka1/status/1376845319510630400

The Polish Ballsuk Borsuk IFV in reference...  


This cocksucker actually thinks the PolePolishers are capable of creating a better IFV? I mean there armor industry is barely better than Ukraine's right now. Also, for reference Damian didn't even make it '20' posts in before he permanently rage-quitted off the forum lol!

Some of the on forum references:

https://www.russiadefence.net/spa/Damian

Damian's absolute bullshit claims about Leo-2 have aged horribly, and the Turks lost 10 Leo-2's in Syria by the end of 2016.


The point where Mindstorm ran him out of town for his laughable eyeball armor measurement ability:

https://www.russiadefence.net/t5066p250-tank-warfare-russian-armour-vs-western-armour#13748

The Borsuk is, pardon my french, a glorified M113 excreted by a post-colon armor industry that can't even modernize itself without the handholding from Hans and Hyung Kook. Its hot garbage; boasting antiquated protection means and even more archaic firepower suite, and its not even wired to connect to a unified tactical control system - pretty unthinkable for what is ostensibly a next gen vehicle.

In fact I'm pretty sure Russians considered and discarded somethign very similar in favor of the current Kurgy:


So, the Poles are literally rolling with second rate designs the Russians themselves regurgitated. How nasty.

The very shallow angle of the upper front of the vehicle means making it rather thick would only mean anything for vertical top attack weapons, and considering that is where the engines are there is little need in super heavy armour there.

A normal shot from the front will come in sideways so its actual thickness would be irrelevant and it is only protecting the engine.

The whole concept of these vehicles is to protect the crew and the troops so to skim a round off the upper front hull would hit the unmanned turret... so it could go right through that without risking any troop or crew member. It is the troop compartment and the crew capsule that are armoured complaining the engine is not well protected... well you can't put heavy armour on everything without making a 50 ton western piece of crap.

If you want a mobility kill just take out the vehicles tracks... the intention of the vehicle design is to protect the men inside it, not the weapons or the engine.

BTW the side armour likely includes both spaced armour for buoyancy and protection... it is amusing that he thinks that is bad.

As mentioned that polish vehicle looks like a Kurganets made love to an M113... which is what Israel is producing at the moment too...

The real question is... what is this Polish vehicle.... a BMP, or is it a complete vehicle family able to replace all the vehicles in a Polish armoured division.

Thing is, even the BMP-3 had more or less STANAG level 6 protection, so frontal armor 30 mm autocannon APDS/APFSDS rated at quite close range under 500 m. We can quibble on how much better Western 30 mm are but whoever cares they have almost similar impact energies and the means to stop them would not differ much. That means the Borsuk, even before rolling out of the production line already has had its main armament rendered obsolete. It wasn't even on the drawing board and the main gun was already obsolete - it was barely a spark in the dendrites of the designer's brain it was obsolete.

Of course, the Bushmaster autocannon can always be upgraded to a 40 mm calibre with relative ease. However, the Kurganets would not share the BMP-3's level of protection either. With at least 7 tons of mass advantage it should have more substantial improvements in protection despite its larger size overall. Toss in an unmanned turret, modern lightweight materials, and incorporating the design lessons of the last 30 years from Chechnya, Iraq, and Syria the improvements in ballistic protection would've been more substantial than what the mass increase might suggest.

And the armor scheme of the BMP-3 was pretty clever despite all the sacrifices they have to make pertaining to making it a more mass production friendly vehicle. The BMP-3 made use of a monocoque Aluminium hull and a one piece shell turret, both just cleverly angled and more importantly rather cheap and easy to make. Together with the dozer and wavebreaker the ballistic protection of the BMP-3 from the front was more than enough, and if ever something does get through it would still have to penetrate the inner layer of fuel tanks. Very simple but very effective ballistic protection for the time.

The Kurganets, in contrast, could be made with a higher tolerance of higher per unit prices than the Soviets would have liked. The Kurganets since it has a front armor layout could make use of the more complex but weight efficient Object 299 armor scheme where an initial layer of armor would be focused on fragmenting and yawing incoming projectiles. The fragmentation and yawing effects would be allowed to develop over the substantial stand-off due to the powerpack present, making it substantially easier to stop the residuals with maybe a fuel tank layer and then a second layer of armor. This is a pretty massive improvement in protection that a single calibre leap or two might not even surpass. I doubt even the Supershot 50 mm calibre with 1 MJ can even reliably overcome the Kurganets armor if its shot beyond point blank ranges.

Haven't mentioned side protection but even the BMP-3 had excellent side protection available to it. The BMP-3 can be kitted out with Relikt 4s24 ERA to the sides and supposedly these could protect even against the tandem warheads of the RPG-29. Could be exaggeration, but what is certain is that no NERA can attain a similar level of effectiveness - and that the side armor modules of the Kurganets have enough space inside to house ERA cassettes. The Kurganets thus can pretty much boast not just high protection against ballistic threats from the front against in class threats but the sides as well.

Thus the only reliable way available to take the Kurganets out with the Borsuk would be at this point be with a top attack munition - if it didn't came out with a pretty substantial upper hemisphere protection suite that is. It also only has the two Spike missiles which makes it difficult to saturate even just one vehicle. You'd sooner run out of missiles than the Kurgy obscurants. You can turn to the tanks for assistance, but the Kurgy stands a good chance of killing the tanks with its own Kornet missiles.

tl;dr: GG; no re.

Kurganets-25 recovery vehicle with ERA side modules:

That is odd... looks like it has the 12.7mm Kord turret of the APC models of new vehicles... anyone know what that flat thing over the rear hull is?

Would have thought a recovery vehicle would have cranes and blades and other engineer equipment...

Did the location you found it mention a code?

BTW I would add in terms of main gun the Kurganets has the 57mm grenade launcher which has an APFSDS round vastly more powerful than the 30mm APFSDS it used to carry with its 2A42 cannon.

The flat thing is normally where you'd put the spare powerpack for field replacements.

The crane and dozer blade are all there, just on the wrong side from where the image was taken from:



I don't know if this has been posted before but here:


Look at the front armor of this thing:


Driver seats upright behind the backwards opening hatch. That means all the space beyond him is half of the final drive and the front armor.

There are two thick cables running around the sides and are draped to the front lip of the wavebreaker - those are the magnetic signature enhancement device, useful for pre-detonating magnetic fuzed overflight anti-tank munitions.

Of course there is the dozer blade protecting the lower hull. As if the whole thing wasn't overkill from the start already.

Note the transverse layout of the powerpack in the parade vehicle. The serial version would have a longitudinal arrangement instead indicated by the driver position on the port side of the hull.

Comparison of silhouettes of the new Polish Borsuk IFV and Kurganets-25

The domestic armored personnel carrier "Boomerang" can be controlled even from a mobile phone. This was stated on the air of the RBC TV channel by Alexander Krasovitsky, General Director of the Military-Industrial Company LLC.

"This" Boomerang " we have today is controlled from a mobile phone. It can move back, forward, turn the turret, barrel. We see the fuel supply, we see the oil temperature, " he said.

https://tass.ru/armiya-i-opk/11587193

Russian_Patriot_ wrote:Comparison of silhouettes of the new Polish Borsuk IFV and Kurganets-25

Kurganets was slated for redesign as it lacked the required internal volume to seat a squad in full gear comfortably. The smaller Borsuk would now have to carry the torch for cramped Eastern IFVs

State tests of infantry fighting vehicles and armored personnel carriers on the Boomerang platform have begun

State tests of the newest armored personnel carrier (APC) K-16 and the wheeled infantry fighting vehicle (BMP) K-17 on the Boomerang platform have begun, Mikhail Osyko , a member of the board of the Military-Industrial Commission (MIC) of the Russian Federation , told TASS on Thursday, August 19 .

“State tests of the vehicle are beginning (BMP and armored personnel carriers on the Boomerang platform - Ed.). An experimental industrial party will appear in the army in the near future, "Osyko said on the eve of the Army-2021 military-technical forum.

The number of new machines will be determined in the new weapons program, added a member of the military-industrial complex.

Osyko drew attention to the fact that due to the good internal volume to accommodate the necessary hardware, the base chassis can be used as a platform for the development of communications and reconnaissance complexes.

On August 18, the head of the Russian Defense Ministry, Sergei Shoigu, announced the department's plans to sign 45 state contracts worth half a trillion rubles during the Army-2021 military-technical forum. We are talking about contracts for the supply of robotic systems "Uran-14", remote mining systems, artillery systems and heavy flamethrower systems, special equipment for the Ground Forces, T-90M tanks and the modernization of T-90 tanks.

The Ministry of Defense will also conclude an agreement on the construction of reconnaissance ships and minesweepers, the supply and modernization of aircraft and the purchase of precision weapons.

The Army-2021 International Military-Technical Forum will be held from 22 to 28 August, 97 countries have confirmed their participation in the event, 34 delegations of which will be headed by the heads of military departments. At the forum, 20 thousand samples of military and dual-use products will be exhibited by about 1.5 thousand enterprises, including those from 12 foreign countries, and will also show weapons and military equipment not only in statics, but also in dynamics, with shooting.

At the same time, according to the head of the Ministry of Defense, the promising military equipment presented at the forum will enter the Russian army this year. In particular, we are talking about Il-112V military transport aircraft, as well as modernized An-124-100 and Mi-8AMTSh-VN helicopters. Also this year, the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation will receive four submarines, three of which are nuclear and one diesel-electric, six surface combat ships and serial multifunctional fifth-generation fighters Su-57. According to Shoigu, such an expansion of the military arsenal will bring the share of modern weapons in the RF Armed Forces to 71.9%.

The forum will take place in the Patriot military-patriotic park, at the Kubinka airfield and the Alabino training ground, as well as in all military districts and in the Northern Fleet. Participants will be able to visit exhibition expositions, demonstration and scientific and business programs, protocol and cultural events.

Russia launches trials of latest armored vehicles based on Bumerang combat platform

According to member of the board of Russia’s Military-Industrial Commission Mikhail Osyko, the quantity of the latest combat vehicles will be specified in Russia’s new armaments program

MOSCOW, August 19. /TASS/. Russia has launched the state trials of the latest K-16 armored personnel carrier and K-17 wheeled infantry fighting vehicle based on the latest Bumerang combat platform, member of the board of Russia’s Military-Industrial Commission Mikhail Osyko told TASS in the run-up to the Army-2021 international military-technical forum on Thursday.

"The state trials of the vehicles [the APCs and the IFVs based on the Bumerang platform] are beginning. An experimental batch will soon arrive for the troops," the defense official said.

The quantity of the latest combat vehicles will be specified in Russia’s new armaments program, he added.

The base chassis can be used as a platform for developing communications and reconnaissance systems as it features a large capacity for installing required equipment, the defense official said.

The Bumerang is the latest standardized wheeled armored platform for multiservice forces developed by Military Industrial Company. The platform was used as the basis for developing the K-17 wheeled infantry fighting vehicle unveiled to the public at the Victory Day Parade on Moscow’s Red Square in 2015, and also the K-16 armored personnel carrier.

The K-17 infantry fighting vehicle’s baseline version is outfitted with the Epokha combat module with a 30mm automatic gun and a coaxial 7.62mm machine-gun and the Kornet anti-tank missile system. The K-16 armored personnel carrier is armed with a combat module with a 12.7mm machine-gun.

https://tass.com/defense/1327729

So that is rather interesting.

I was thinking the 30mm cannon armed turret was a stopgap until the 57mm grenade launcher turret was ready... well to be totally honest I thought the 57mm high velocity air defence gun was going to be used on the BMPs in Kurganets and Armata and Boomerang units to sort of mix the anti armour performance of the high velocity 57mm cannon with the HE power of the 57mm grenade launcher, but we have since found the 57mm grenade launcher can fire APFSDS rounds with a case volume and length greatly exceeding that available for the 30mm rounds so the 57mm grenade launcher would be an excellent replacement upgrade for the 30mm cannon on its own.

This article seems to suggest Boomerang BMPs will use the 30mm cannon turret, which will likely reduce production pressure on the new 57mm rounds in both new calibres that would be used in the Kurganets and Armata forces... it makes sense because you would only need better than a 30mm round against better equipped enemies which means you probably want heavier armour too.

I was wondering why they were developing command detonation 30mm cannon shells and at the same time introducing 57mm calibre new weapons whose larger projectiles would offer more space and more HE and fragmentation content... but it is clear they want to continue to use these weapons together...

Which I suspect means their missile armed Tunguska and Pantsir vehicles will retain their 30mm cannons, while the 2S38 57mm AA guns might have light missiles like Verba or Pine fitted but wont be replacing the 30mm guns completely.

I don't really see the point of such vehicles. The gun is good against tanks but it is unlikely it survive such engagement. And its ability to carry soldier is reduced and most wouldn't want to get in near 125mm shells that aren't protected and even 30mm gun could detonate.

Only positive point is mobility.

Against any other vehicle than tanks the 57mm with apfsds is more than good and most new turrets have built in atgm launchers to deal with anything at long distances.

Isos wrote:I don't really see the point of such vehicles. The gun is good against tanks but it is unlikely it survive such engagement. And its ability to carry soldier is reduced and most wouldn't want to get in near 125mm shells that aren't protected and even 30mm gun could detonate.

As I understand these would be used more like a mobile field gun/ light assault gun for direct fire support against lighter enemy forces.

Hole wrote:

"High-precision complexes" plan to create a wheeled tank with a 125-mm gun. 

The holding company "High-precision complexes" of the Rostec Corporation is considering the possibility of creating a light wheeled floating tank with a 125-mm gun, the deputy chief designer of the Volgograd Tractor Plant (as part of KMZ, it is part of "High-Precision complexes"), Vladimir Budaev, told RIA Novosti. 

​"We have an idea to put the Sprut-SDM1 combat compartment on a wheelbase, which is likely to be floating. What specific wheelbase we will put the module on is an open question, since today there are many successful wheeled chassis in the Russian Federation, and everything depends on the final purpose of the wheeled tank, on which troops it will have to go to" – he said.

As the deputy chief designer specified, " it is assumed that the wheeled Sprut will be export-oriented." Budaev explained that the use of a wheeled tank in the Armed Forces is less likely, since priority is traditionally given to tracked chassis, taking into account the peculiarities of the Russian geography.

Source: 

Boomerang and Sprut are already up and running, they just need to put them together, makes sense

The future and present of the Russian army

Isos wrote:I don't really see the point of such vehicles. The gun is good against tanks but it is unlikely it survive such engagement. And its ability to carry soldier is reduced and most wouldn't want to get in near 125mm shells that aren't protected and even 30mm gun could detonate.

Only positive point is mobility.

Against any other vehicle than tanks the 57mm with apfsds is more than good and most new turrets have built in atgm launchers to deal with anything at long distances.

I agree but we keep seeing these things. One example is the Japanese Type 16. Their excuse was given as Japan is an archipelago so fast movement of troops by air was necessary and they needed a light vehicle. The other excuse was they wanted a fast vehicle that would move on paved roads. Same excuses that led the US to that wonderful Striker MGS.
So Japan has three tank-ish like vehicles. The Type 90 for Hokkaido, the Type 10 for mainland Japan, and the Type 16 for the rest.