Abrams

[Sea Skimmer]

Good old BMP-3, wonder how long it takes the crew to decide what to shoot back with?

"Comrade, American capitalist pig dog Bradley and infantry direct front!"
"100mm HEF, up, Comrade!"
"Nyet, use the anti-tank raketa!"
"Nyet, use the 30mm autocannon!!"
"Nyet you fools, use them all, and fire all three machine guns too for good measure!"

Heh

I'm not fond of BMP-3 myself, though. It has several faults, including the horrible crew compartment design, weak aluminium armour and antiquated combat systems. Latter problem can be relatively easily corrected up to western standards, but it also increases the price of the vehicle.

Aluminium armour makes the BMP-3 also several tons lighter. The firepower is superior to any IFV in the world, I believe, and at 60* angle the 30mm cannon can be used against aerial targets such as helicopters.

Still, compared to the excellent Swedish CV90, BMP-3 has only one clear advantage -- its price. This is, of course, only the opinion of an armchair general.

CV9030FIN

The armor may be aluminum, buts it still provides quite good protection. If a fire gets hot enough to effect it, the crew is long since dead and the ammunition is exploding.

The CV90 series is excellent, though I'd like to see the IFV variants with a pair of single shot TOW's on it with no reloads like the Dardo. CV90120-T kicks ass.

[MKSheppard]

Please stick to responding to the important parts like the quote from Heinz Guderian and the fact that the spalling was limited to very early tanks and isolated batches contrary to what you said earlier.

BULLSHIT. Every tank has problems with spalling, even the
mighty Tiger I, which was made of very high quality armor plate.
You hit something enough times, the armor WILL break off under
repeated impacts, no ifs, ands, or buts...

Modern tanks use layered armor and kevlar liners to prevent
spalling from reaching the fighting compartment, but back then,
only the Tiger I had double-layered armor, and it STILL had
problems with spalling.

A tactic of Sherman crews in normandy was to fire as fast
as they could at Tigers in the hopes of causing spalling inside
that would wound the Tiger's crew and cause a withdrawal.

[Sea Skimmer]

A lot of the tanks in that pictoral overload were used in security roles. The M4A3, Firefly, KV-1 and even the M3 were superior to at least some German tanks of the era (I could even see Pz-II crews using captured Crusaders). The 75mm gun on the M3 was better than the 50mm on the Pz-III at the time.

The bit at the end with the pictures wasn't important anyway. Please stick to responding to the important parts like the quote from Heinz Guderian and the fact that the spalling was limited to very early tanks and isolated batches contrary to what you said earlier.

Spalling will always be a problem with any tank made of metel. Even modern spall liners and rubber inserts only go so far. The T-34's however had neither.

[Oberleutnant]

The armor may be aluminum, buts it still provides quite good protection. If a fire gets hot enough to effect it, the crew is long since dead and the ammunition is exploding.

The CV90 series is excellent, though I'd like to see the IFV variants with a pair of single shot TOW's on it with no reloads like the Dardo. CV90120-T kicks ass.

EDIT: If you like IFVs with TOWs, then how about this?




AMOS mounted on a Finnish XA-203 APC


AMOS (Advanced MOrtar System) is a joint project by the Finnish company Patria and the Swedish Hägglunds that was tested and ordered by the Finnish Defence Forces. It is a next generation breach-loaded 120mm mortar, capable of also firing smart guided ammunition and cargo munitions. AMOS can be installed on a variety of platforms, such as the Patria XA-series APCs, Hägglunds CV90, M113, BMP-3, Patria AMV. Now I'll quote: http://members.surfeu.fi/stefan.allen/

-- Crew 2+1 (commander, gunner + driver)

-- Main armament 2 x 120mm breech loaded smoothbore mortars (3000mm barrell lenght each)

-- Automatic loading system

-- Hydro-pneumatic recoiling system

-- Secondary armament: machinegun, smoke launchers

-- High rate of fire thanks to the double barrel concept: 26 rounds in 60
seconds, of which the first 4 in less than 8 seconds

-- Time to shoot less than 30 seconds

-- Time to scoot less than 10 seconds

-- Range over 10 km with standard 120mm ammunition. 15 km with long range ammunition. 5 km with STRIX

-- Multiple rounds simultaneous impact (MRSI) up to 14 rounds per turret

-- Large on-board ammunition supply: over 66 rounds payload on XA-185 6X6 vehicle

-- Ammunition (total on-board) 84 rounds high explosive (HE) and 6 rounds smart guided ammunition

-- Suitable with standard 120 ammunition as well as smart guided ammunition and cargo munitions

-- Integrated laser sight and rangefinder, and is thereby capable of independently engaging the enemy

-- Devastating and accurate direct-fire capability, especially against soft targets and infantry

-- Computerized fire control which allows pre-programmed fire missions

-- Low chassis loads thanks to the recoiling mechanism; even a wheeled chassis is usable

-- Rapid deployment thanks to instrumentation for vehicle location and attitude; well suited for shoot & scoot tactics

-- Direct fire capability

-- Full 360° traverse without limitations thanks to turret mounting and recoil mechanism

-- Traverse and elevation is electrical / manual

-- Turret weight 4400 kg

-- -3 to +85 degrees elevation

-- Ballistic protection against infantry weapons and splinters for crew

-- Muzzle blast and NBC protection for crew

-- Add-On armor available as option


Israeli Military Industries is currently developing cargo and cluster ammunition for AMOS while Swedish companies Bofors and Saab are making an infrared guided smart bomb "Stryx" with a range of 5 kilometres.


I'll quote the same site again:

Firing 26 dual-purpose cargo rounds each in 60 seconds, six vehicles can put a total of 156 rounds at the same target. Of these the first 14 from each vehicle (84 rounds total) would hit at the same time. At an altitude of 400 meters above the target, these 156 rounds would disperse over an area of 60 X 100 meters in an X - pattern.

In 60 seconds the target area would be showered with a total of 4992 (2688 submunitions within the first few seconds) dual-purpose shaped-charge / anti-personnel submuinitions, each of which are powerful enough to cut through the roof on a Main Battle Tank or any Armored Personnel Carrier, with the shrapnel ripping through unprotected personnel, vehicles, equipment and exposed vehicle sights, rangefinders and thermal imagers. 4992 bomblets in 6000 m2 means nearly one bomblet per square meter average.




AMOS on CV90


AMOS looks very promising and might have some future in the export markets. What do you think?

[Sea Skimmer]

You call that a mortar? This is a mortar!



The 2S4 240-mm SELF-PROPELLED MORTAR (SM-240)
The 240-mm self-propelled mortar known to the West as the M-1975 is known as the SM-240 (2S4) by the former Soviet Army, although its more common name is the Tyulpan, or Tulip Tree. The M-1975 consists of a much modified GMZ tracked minelaying vehicle carrying a 240-mm M-240 breech-loading mortar on the hull rear. The mortar is carried complete with a baseplate and is hydraulically lowered from its traveling position around a pivot on the hull rear. The baseplate is hinged to the hull rear so that when emplaced the mortar barrel faces away from the hull. The 240-mm mortar is lowered into the firing position under remote-control and when in position can be elevated from +45 to +80° with a traverse of 8° left and right. Some rounds are probably carried inside the vehicle hull and it is likely that some form of assisted loading is provided. The rate of fire is probably about one round a minute, with firing being by remote-control. The hull of the vehicle is of all-welded steel armor with the engine compartment at the front right and driver front left. The commander is seated to the rear of the driver and has a raised cupola with an externally mounted 12.7-mm anti-aircraft machine gun. A further hatch is to the rear of the commander's cupola with a similar outward opening hatch on the opposite side of the vehicle roof. Ammunition is stowed internally and is loaded into the mortar using a hand-operated crane mounted at the rear of the vehicle on the left side. The mortar sighting system is on the right side of the mortar. Suspension is of the torsion bar type with each side having six road wheels with the drive sprocket at the front, idler at the rear and four track-return rollers. Firing a standard 130 kg HE round designated the F-864, a minimum range of 800-m and a maximum range of 9700-m can be achieved. In addition there is understood to be an extended-range round with a maximum range of 20000 m. Other rounds include a chemical projectile and nuclear. A concrete-piercing round for use against urban targets has been reported.
In Grozny entire buildings where falttened by single shots. Now if it was fitted with an autoloader and paired with my 240mm Crusader upgrade and T-1000 9 turreted urban assault tank..

[Pablo Sanchez]

Actually, they don't have to. Can we say "partial penetrations" and "interior armor spalling?"

Why else do you think the ATR was so useful against the Panzers? You don't
have to send a big whacking round ALL the way through and out the back
to fuck a tank up. Hit it repeatedly, and cause interior spalling of armor,
which in turn wounds the crew, causing them to bail out in pain before
they get shredded by their own armor.

Okay. Let's say 10 Pz-III and 10 T-34 engagement in steppe terrain at 800 meters. The Panzers begin to hit immediately, but once the T-34s lay in the gun, they can dispatch each enemy vehicle with one (two on the outside) hits.

Soviet Losses:
Minor to major crew wounds, a few crew fatalities

German losses:
Multiple tanks
Many crew injuries, fatalities, or captured.

Which is better, Sheppard?

I never said the T-34 was perfect, I just said that it was revolutionary and a superior machine. Your efforts to prove that it was imperfect are successful, but ultimately do not challenge the point.

[Vympel]

"The BMP-3M variant has been revealed, and is available in three variants for both production as an upgrade to already produced BMP-3s. There are also numerous foreign upgrades for the BMP-3, considering the large amount in service internationally.

Variant A is purely an ammunition upgrade and includes a new ATGM to replace the Bastion with enhanced lethality and increased range, new 100mm HEF round (3UOF19) with enhanced lethality and increased range, new 30mm Armor-Piercing Discarding Sabot (APDS) round and a new digital computer.
The new 100mm ATGM is called the Arkan (9M117M1) and has a maximum range of 5,500m and is fitted with a tandem High-Explosive Anti-Tank (HEAT) warhead.
The 100mm HEF projectile has a maximum range of 7,000m and is twice as effective as the older round, with better dispersion characteristics.

Variant B includes the ammunition upgrade plus a fire-control subsystems upgrade which includes a new integrated gunner's sight and the installation of a new weapon stabilizer system for increased accuracy.
The integrated gunner's sight includes a mirror stabilization system, day channel with adjustable magnification, laser range-finder, laser-guidance system, thermal imager (replacing the IR searchlight of the original) and auto tracker and display.

Variant C is the most advanced and consists of a brand new unitary turret/ fighting compartment fitted with a high-resolution automatic fire-control system, new ammunition reserve and a single reloading system for all ammunition. Rate of fire is said to be 12-18 rpm for the 100mm gun, while loading of the ATGM doesn’t exceed 6 seconds. The new turret allows 1.5 times the ammunition to be carried, and practically excludes fumes when firing the 100mm gun.
It includes the integrated gunner's sight as well as a new commander's panoramic stabilized sight with TV channel, laser range-finder and display. This system allows for hunter/killer target engagements to take place (the commander designating targets for the gunner, as on modern tanks).
Variant C also has a new feeding systems for the 30mm cannon and 7.62 mm coaxial machine gun. The turret itself is of all-welded construction, with an additional layer of spaced armor along the frontal arc for increased protection.

Other upgrades offered for the BMP-3 include a UTD-32 660hp engine, improving the already high power-to-weight ratio, and an air conditioning system. Optional is the addition of the Arena APS and ERA (already supplied to the vehicles in the UAE). Kaktus ERA raises the combat weight of the vehicle to 23 tons.

The new unitary turret with all upgrades can also be fitted to the BMP-2, which becomes the BMP-2M, the export-only BTR-90 wheeled APC, which becomes the BTR-90M, and the BMD-3, which becomes the BMD-3M."

Again, my own collation from various sources. The vehicle's been in service for ten years- the Russians have refined the shit out of it in that time. The 'M' upgrade is most impressive- you should see the new turret it looks very clean compared to the old one- and they can put it on a BMD-3!!!

[Sea Skimmer]

What I want to know is what ever happened to the BMP-4 project. It was going to be basically a BMP-3 with a new bigger turret mounting a 45mm auto cannon. However little information has ever surfaced, and the BMP-4 designation has been given to a new vehicle meant for urban only combat.

Guess it must have either been only a design study or simply got killed very early.

[Vympel]

I've seen the 'BMP-4' designation on fas.org/man and I'm pretty sure its an erroneous one- the heavy IFV designed for urban combat is definitely called BTR-T by the authorative Russian sources (T-55 chassis).

There's also a BMPT (T-72B chassis) but it's not an IFV- more an armor support vehicle for use in various situations, not least of which urban combat- twin 30mm autocannons for doing the job inappropriately applied to the expensive, thin-skinned ZSU-23-4 Shilka and 2S6M Tunguska (6 were lost in the disastrous attack on Grozny in the First Chechen War 94-96), four Ataka-T missiles for blasting strongpoints, twin 30mm grenade launchers (AG-17), covered in thick armor with ERA. Damn mean.

http://63.99.108.76/ubb/Forum13/HTML/001112.html

There's a link from there that leads to a picture of the turret.

I heard about the 45mm autocannon in a VERY short piece off the Jane's website; who knows it may yet still pop up on the next gen IFV, when it's required- not for a long time I suspect; probably 2010.

[Sea Skimmer]

I've seen the 'BMP-4' designation on fas.org/man and I'm pretty sure its an erroneous one- the heavy IFV designed for urban combat is definitely called BTR-T by the authorative Russian sources (T-55 chassis).

There's also a BMPT (T-72B chassis) but it's not an IFV- more an armor support vehicle for use in various situations, not least of which urban combat- twin 30mm autocannons for doing the job inappropriately applied to the expensive, thin-skinned ZSU-23-4 Shilka and 2S6M Tunguska (6 were lost in the disastrous attack on Grozny in the First Chechen War 94-96), four Ataka-T missiles for blasting strongpoints, twin 30mm grenade launchers (AG-17), covered in thick armor with ERA. Damn mean.

http://63.99.108.76/ubb/Forum13/HTML/001112.html

There's a link from there that leads to a picture of the turret.

I heard about the 45mm autocannon in a VERY short piece off the Jane's website; who knows it may yet still pop up on the next gen IFV, when it's required- not for a long time I suspect; probably 2010.

I've seen BMP-4 repeated by enough articles and sights, which aren’t hacks to FAS to believe it's correct.

[Vympel]

Oh I don't disagree that a BMP-4 may exist as a designation, but it's application to the BTR-T is certainly wrong. No Russians sources that should know (like promotional material on a weapons show website) have ever called the BTR-T 'BMP-4'.

[Sea Skimmer]

We'll if something gets repeated enough, it may very well become true. Witness the SR-71..