Russian-made vehicle suggestions for PA :armysmile:

H-APC (BTR-T)

H-APC (BTR-T) constructed on the base of T-55 tank - is the only APC in the world the level of protection of which is the same as of the modem battle tanks. Armored hull equipped with dynamic protection and modern MDW pro-tective means, protects the crew: commander, driver and 5 paratroopers.

APC is equipped with the 2A42 30mm automatic gun and launching device for the anti-tank missiles "Konkurs" or "Kornet", also it can be equipped with different gun and rocket weapon complexes according to the customer's order.

Fighting compartment has 5 comfortable seats for the paratroopers. Para-troopers leave the compartment through the 2 top armored hatches, which can be installed vertically providing armored screen while leaving the vehicle or placing the paratroopers outside on the vehicle.

At the mass of 38.5 tons, the speed of H - APC is up to 50 km/h.

rbs.ru

BMP3M (BMP-4)

Basically the up-armored variant of BMP3. ERA is claimed to stop up to 30mm cannon hits, better protection against HEAT, it has Shtora+ARENA, 100mm main gun with option of firing Arkan ATGM.

only 5 dismounts for BTR-T not very practical in philippine operations where apc should have at least 8 capacity

Our APCs ought to be amphibious

amphibious naman siguro ang bmp3 :armywink:

tignan mo pa babad na babad sa reactive surface coating!

di to mapapasabog lng nang basta basta ng mga RPG's ng rebelde dito weheheh

upgraded BMP3s are now officially called BMP-4 , more powerful engine to carry the extra ERA weight and improved rear ramp and more weapons options, IMO this BMP, bang for the buck, is very applicable to PA ops.


:armycheers:

Are you sure? Up-armored and upgraded BMP-3s are just designated BMP-3M and not BMP-4.

And that BTR-T is designed for MOUT ops and not for guerilla warfare - too slow and too heavy.

That BMP is not pretty to look at but sure as hell is functional, but then the Stryker with its 'bird cage' enclosure looks ungainly too. :devilwink:

Thickest ERA blocks ive ever seen. Plus the BMPs low silhouette, a very difficult target to hit and immobilize. :rifle:

The BMP-3M is a great improvement over the previous 3 variants, the changes brought about by the Russian Army's experiences in Chechnya. In addition to the extra thick ERA blocks, the 3M also has the Arena active defense system where onboard sensors detect incoming rounds and launch up to 10 projectiles to intercept the enemy shots. Pretty neat, and for a price of $500K a copy, the 3M is a good alternative to brandnew Western-made IFVs.

And it is air-conditioned too... :armysmile:

Man, from what I learn from your posts, I really would like our govt to add that BMP to the probable procurement list. :armywink:

The only problem I see with ERA on an IFV or AFV is its effect on dismounted troops when it gets hit. Maybe instead of ERA, use applique armor instead?

if im a dismount i will stay right behind that bmp :rifle:

should we buy russian? definitely yes
enough of us-made equipment that always fall short of the real promised thing and i dont buy that argument that russian mil equipment are substandard, well that bmp3m may not be as hightech as bradley but its better than m113 and v150 or simba

:agree: The US maybe the world's number one arms provider but Russian arms sales in Asia are MORE THAN DOUBLE those of America.

If the other Asian countries are buying, why not us?

That BMP-3M has no ARENA active defense system installed yet. I don't see any millimeter wave radar on top of the turret.

bakit hindi?

tignan mo ang mga thai at malaysians, wala naman silang kiyeme bumili from the russians eh tayo in love na in love sa mga american equipment ee bulok naman

I really would like our AFP to consider the BMP-3, at 800K dollars fully loaded, its affordable compared to the European and American new gen IFVs.

Half million US only without the ERA blocks ...
and Russia is always accepting of payment in kind :demon:

i think i'll love the russian... especially the ladies :rifle:

Prices of other Russian-made armoured vehicles:

in US Dollars

T-55 98,139
T-62 82,571
T-64 - 230,880
T-64A - 249,033
T-64B1 -421,934
T-72A - 337,247
T-72B - 421,200
T-80UD 1,143,480


affordable




:thumb:

The AFP, particularly the Marines, looked at the BMP-3 a while back. In the end they decided that it did not suit their doctrines, and they proposed the purchase of AAV7P instead.

Another thing we have to consider when deciding weapons purchases is the impact on logistics:

- Required training (how good are the Russians at after-sales support)

- New types of ammunition

- Spares

All three have hidden costs.

Given the close relationship between China and Russia, if a conflict ever broke out between us and the PRC, do you think we can count on the Russians to continue to supply us with the spares and ammunition required to keep our Russian equipment functional?

The PMC tested the non-Marine enhanced variant of the BMP-3 which is more suited to PA.

Killhorn is referring to the BMP-3F

Russian Tracked Vehicles

Personally, I prefer the BMP-3F over the AAV7P. It costs much much less and is better armed and protected. Its firepower right off the beach!

:agree: but still it depends on the AFP to decide.. :specool:

AAV pa rin yan kasi millions ang SOP :demon:

The AAV is excellent at transporting the grunts to shore but has limited armor and armaments.

The BMP, while cramped for the troops inside, can swim from assault ship to shore then blast its way through beach defenses with ease compared to the lightly armed AAV.

Apparently its not the PMC's game plan to have their amphibous transport blast itself away from shore. Remember, the BMP is not all that well protected either. Who knows, they could be relying on another vehicle acquisition to provide the firepower component of their beach assault units.

I remember in the old Opus forum, MBLT was talking about how they already had a design for a muzzle brake that would minimize the recoil of the 152mm gun on the M-551 Sheridan. (To see is to believe of course). So instead of a "jack of all trades, master of none" solution they may be going for a specialized approach.

If an piece of gear doesn't fit in with the overall strategy, then its a waste of resources.

Is this cost-effective? And the assault ship can only carry as much vehicles.




:armyhuh:

agree with tantalus...

if a vehicle can be >BOTH< and IFV and an FSV, is it waste of resources? i think not...

the BMP-3F can protect itself better against MBTs and even helos and can even swim with ERA added, its extra firepower can provide support to infantry in real time..

You have to match your equipment acquisition with your objective. My take on the situation is that the Marines want to get as many troops on the beach in as short a time as possible.

The AAVP7 can carry 25 combat ready troops. The BMP can only carry 7. To satify the above objective you would need either 3.5 (make that 4) BMPs to accomplish what a single AAVP7 can do -- or have a single BMP make 4 trips, back and forth from the LST.

The first option will quadruple the initial BMP purchase cost; the latter will give the enemy more time to respond.

If we consider simple COIN scenarios, the PMC will need more BMPs to match the transport benefits of the AAVP -- again because the latter can move more people.

If the overall strategy does not call for a one-size-fits all vehicle, then it is a waste of resources. Because the money spent on it could have been better spent on vehicles that support the chosen doctrine.

To make the most of your resouces, get something that will really do the job. The BMP is:

- Not much of a transport because it carries too few troops

- Not much of a defense against MBTs, because it's too lightly armored

So what objective will it really satisfy? The AAVP may be vulnerable, but at least is satisfies a specific need. Making it a good buy.

The BMP 3 wouldn't stand a chance going head to head with an MBT. IFVs were never intended to do so. Their job is mainly to protect / transport the infantry that escort the MBTs.

BMP with ERA addons


* All-round protection against PG-9S grenades:
- with і 0.8 probability in the areas covered by ERA tiles;
- with і 0.5 probability in the areas covered by grill screens.
* No breach of the main armor when hit by AT grenades.
* Protection against AP bullets:
- 12.7mm B-32 AP bullets - point-blank;
- 14.5mm B-32 AP bullets - at 50m.
* Hull protection against 30mm AP ammunition at firing angles of ±30° at 0m.
* Reduction of irretrievable losses of vehicles by a factor of 5
* Increase of possibility of vehicle combat efficiency restoration by a factor of 8
* Reduction of irretrievable losses of the crew and troops by a factor of 12
* Total weight of the kit: 4,150 kg.

niistali.ru

im impressed with that BMP :thumb:

ok naman siguro ang aftersales support ng mga russians, bumili na ng bmp 3 ang united arab emirates at south korea tapos susunod ang thailand...kaya suhestiyon ko lapit na tayo sa mga russians, wala tayong mapapala sa mga kano at kung meron man karamihan bulok ... :rifle:

If we go head to head with the Chinese (currently main potential enemy), can we we still count on Russian support?

I'm not blind to the short comings of the US relationship . . . but we do have a mutual defense treaty with them, which is more that we can say for the Russians.

I think so. The Russians aren't exactly politically chummy with the Chinese. Their current relationship is more business than ideology. It will not look good on the Russian arms industry if they withhold parts and ordnance support in the event of a conflict with China. Remember, China is not their only big-time customer, India (a known China rival) is a far more lucrative Russian arms buyer than China. Other countries too will think twice in buying more equipment from Russia if this embargo happens.

Not only armored vehicles but transport trucks too. Kamaz trucks are cheap, yet quality alternatives to US-madetrucks.

The Russians have a much closer relationship with the Chinese than they do with us. Practically every piece of Chinese equipment has Russian influences . . . even the Chinese space program benefits from Russian assistance. I seriously doubt if they could turn their backs on that so easily.

i agree with adrott here..dont buy russian instead by singaporean, we have better quality vehicles and weapons... :armysmile:

the Bionix then, its as versatile as the M113... it even has a bridge layer variant :drunk:

Bionix AVLB