Kurganets & Boomerang Discussions Thread #2

The snout was lengthened and there seems to be an additional layer of armor
on top of the engine compartment.

Hole wrote:The snout was lengthened and there seems to be an additional layer of armor
on top of the engine compartment.

The thing is the UFP is now a good 20-30 cm higher, either that is to fit an absurd amount of composite armour for plate at such a high angle, or it is to both expand the engine compartment and add armour.

That said with the prominence of loitering munitions perhaps very thick composites for the roves of armoured vehicles are now deemed necessary.

Hopefully in the longer term they can adapt APS systems to detect drones and perhaps develop suites of electronics and sensors and weapons to deal with them through a combination of jammers and smoke as well as lasers to blind or destroy them physically or render them ineffective, but also allow detection and reporting of drones to other vehicles and individual soldiers so they can be aware of active threats and take precautions at the very least or countermeasures where possible.

Kurganets-25 on the way home from a training ground.

All the new-gen vehicle platforms have to be impervious to small cheap suicide drones whether through one means or another (APS, spaced armour, EW jamming, etc...) - otherwise there is no sense in introducing them

With the Kurgents-25 the engine is at the front of the vehicle, and so is the driver. This is key as in the era of drones you cannot rely on the rear of the vehicle being largely safe from the enemy. You need to either have all-round defense, or you need to make sure that everything vital can be got at only through the sides of the vehicle that are the most armored. That's the engine and the driver. So long as they're intact, then whatever else happens, the vehicle along with any casualties can always escape.
In addition - unmanned turrets are a vital feature too; they help save space and keep the crew in one spot where they can be protected better.

So the Kurganets-25 is basically ready for this new type of warfare already. It just needs some EW systems.

All the new-gen vehicle platforms have to be impervious to small cheap suicide drones whether through one means or another (APS, spaced armour, EW jamming, etc...) - otherwise there is no sense in introducing them

I understand what you are trying to say but there is no such thing as anything proof.... a small cheap suicide drone can carry an RPG-7 warhead designed to detonate vertically downward... no level of cage or chain or ERA is going to stop most of those.

If you want to delay the introduction of a system until you are sure it is perfectly safe then it will never enter production.

Equally as we have seen it is in service stuff that gets modifications in the field that test new defensive and attacking ideas so that properly designed and made improved versions can be started if they work out to be effective on the battlefield... so putting new things into service is the best way to test them once their obvious bugs have been sorted out. It is a shame for whatever reason they have not been using APS systems operationally even in limited numbers just get get real experience and upgrades and improvements that come with both operational but also production experience.

In addition - unmanned turrets are a vital feature too; they help save space and keep the crew in one spot where they can be protected better.

Unmanned turrets that don't penetrate into the hull also create more room inside the vehicle and reduce the chance of an ammo fire getting to the crew or troop compliment.

Obviously with the bigger guns or the missile armed vehicles the troop compartment becomes the ammo storage area so escape options for the driver and commander and gunner become important.

So the Kurganets-25 is basically ready for this new type of warfare already. It just needs some EW systems.

It is always going to need upgrades and improvements as they become available... the electronics and systems on an aircraft are called avionics... the concept behind the new vehicle family was to create a set of electronics and systems for ground vehicles that can be transferred between vehicle chassis using different engines and different hulls and different transmissions and arrangements regarding wheels or tracks, so as new EW systems and laser jammers and smoke systems and coatings and cages and ERA and skirts and APS systems are developed they should be able to be applied to all the vehicle families to upgrade them all... they have built in growth potential in terms of engine power for weight increases, and the armour is supposed to be modular to allow increases and improvements to be applied over the life of the vehicles.

Well the turtle-tanks seem to be drone-proof

So build an APC based on those principles. Fortunately I think the Kurganets-25 largely fits the bill already

There is no sense introducing equipment that is already vulnerable or obsolete. Certainly not any kind of armoured vehicle. When the T-62 was introduced, was it vulnerable to the tank cannons and AT missiles of the day?

flamming_python wrote:

There is no sense introducing equipment that is already vulnerable or obsolete. Certainly not any kind of armoured vehicle. When the T-62 was introduced, was it vulnerable to the tank cannons and AT missiles of the day?

The T-62 was vulnerable to the guns of it's contemporaries, most missiles and even anti tank rocket launchers at the time of it's introduction. It was however resistent to the older tank guns it would face in numbers were a conflict to occur.