calripson wrote:Why continue to spend money on BMP-3? Time to move 100% to new generation vehicles.
Because tgere are lot of new vehickes based on bmp-3 which isn't supposed to be replaced.
Kurganets 25 will replace bmp-1/2 mainly.
calripson wrote:Why continue to spend money on BMP-3? Time to move 100% to new generation vehicles.
calripson wrote:Why continue to spend money on BMP-3? Time to move 100% to new generation vehicles.
x_54_u43 and LMFS like this post
Why continue to spend money on BMP-3? Time to move 100% to new generation vehicles.
Because tgere are lot of new vehickes based on bmp-3 which isn't supposed to be replaced.
Those modernized БМП-3 procurements would have happened anyway
MMBR likes this post
GarryB and George1 like this post
MMBR likes this post
GarryB and George1 like this post
GarryB, medo, ahmedfire, George1 and lyle6 like this post
With investments in modernized FCS and communications suite for the tanks like the T-72B3, it only makes sense to continue and develop the offensive capabilities of the IFVs these very same tanks would be operating alongside with. Look at Desert Storm; the M2 Bradleys with their thermal sights and guided missiles were able to rack up much more kills than the M1 Abrams did. It also cushions the military from complications with the Kurganets and Bumerang development cycles, which given the experience of most nations trying to introduce their own version of the next gen medium class IFV are bound to be frought with delays, and tech teething issues. At they very least the situation of the August war where the Russian army is ill-equipped compared to their foe and only carried the day through sheer speed and agression should be avoided.calripson wrote:Why continue to spend money on BMP-3? Time to move 100% to new generation vehicles.
MMBR likes this post
MMBR likes this post
Isos wrote:Mine clearing vehicles operate on the frontline and could even be used just in front of enemy which will have the possibility to fire at it. T14 and t-90 behind will cover them but that's not enough.
Afghanit will intercept anything thrown at them and that will oblige the enemy to fire multiple time so get out of cover and be spotted by t-14/90.
Other bmp3 work with infantry around so launching the explosive from afghan it will be dangerous for them.
GarryB, George1 and LMFS like this post
GarryB likes this post
franco wrote:Read an article in the past couple of days in which it was stated there were 150 of these ordered.
LMFS wrote:franco wrote:Read an article in the past couple of days in which it was stated there were 150 of these ordered.
Is there already an official version name for this vehicle? Does it have the engine at the front as the Manul?
LMFS likes this post
MMBR and LMFS like this post
Infantry fighting vehicles have undergone a deep modernization, while increasing their fire capabilities. As part of the uninhabited combat module "Epoch" – 57-mm gun, with a gun paired 7.62-mm machine gun PKTM with ammunition 2 thousand rounds. A distinctive feature of the new combat compartment of the BMP "Berezhok" is the presence in its composition of the ATGM "Kornet" with ammunition from eight missiles, four of which are immediately ready for launch, and in addition to the 30-mm automatic gun, an automatic grenade launcher is installed.
GarryB wrote:So is it the 57mm gun or a 30mm cannon fitted?
GarryB likes this post