Yes, we continue the theme of "Boomerang". Precisely because, as usual with us, 80% of the commenting masses did not understand anything, and did not particularly bother themselves with reading. However, the usual thing.
To continue the topic I was prompted by the next Personal Opinion of Mr. Anirala of the sofa troops. In which he so imposingly said that "all this is garbage, before the RPG all are equal." But because "Boomerang", that BTR-82 - there is no difference.
My God, and this is in the 21st century, and on the "Voennoye Obozreniye" they post such nonsense …
Okay, let's drive the wheels in order.
RPG-7. Weapons of Arabs and Negroes. Well, and the militia in case of the last war. Volkssturm of the 21st century will look like this: AKM from warehouses and RPG-7 from there. What if you get lucky?
Immediately I understand that whoever speaks here precisely in terms of the fact that an RPG is a scrap against which there is no admission, that this RPG has only seen on video. And to shoot … Well, yes, why is it for the sofa?
My colleague Krivov and I were given a try two years ago. At the exercises where we filmed. Mishenka - a mock-up of a tank, 300 meters before her. There was a briefing. They showed everything. Well, we shot, in accordance with the information received.
Of course they didn't. But they had the notion that after such a shot they wouldn't give you another shot, unless the mentally retarded ones are on the other side.
So, gentlemen of the sofa, with all my heart I wish you to check on yourself how it is, RPG against a tank. Not in computer shooters, but in nature. Negroes and Arabs sometimes succeed, but even they prefer Tou.
I want to live …
Do not write nonsense, I beg you. RPG-7 (as well as AKM) today is the weapon of an African rogue, a rebel in the jungle and a pirate on a launch. A clever fighter of a modern army with this thing, perhaps, will show something, but not for long.
Because they are not fools in a tank or an infantry fighting vehicle, and they probably know how to use optics, cameras, thermal imagers and - most importantly - machine guns! And for their part, they will do everything so that the understanding that the idea of firing an RPG at a tank is not the best idea flies into your head.
And God forbid that the understanding was 7.62 mm, and not 12.7.
In general, a disposable weapon of a disposable organism.
We will now talk about serious things. About whether we even need these "Boomerangs", for which I so stood up. True, the shadow of the Su-57 completely covered them, but nothing, let's try to make a second attempt. What if it works out?
So, in principle, we have a development and even several assembled copies (ceremonial), like for testing, a wheeled armored personnel carrier K-16 and a tracked BMP K-17. Well, in the future, a whole bunch of other machines, both combat plan and special, repair and others.
What confuses many today is the size. Arguments are based on the size of the K-16. But since the marshals and generals of the couch, then all this does not look very logical.
Yes, K-16 is quite good in terms of height, that is, height. Taller tanks are obtained. Many have paid attention to this. And also heavy, 32 tons.
Cons: High means easier to hit. So we need a low and fast APC! But he already exists! This is the BTR-82A! Hooray!
And stuff like that.
I will note right away that not everything that is low is good.
Where is the place of armored personnel carriers in modern combat? And over there. Behind everyone. An armored personnel carrier - he is a transporter for that, to take the infantry to the line of disembarkation and disembark it. Tanks went, infantry went, and only behind them crawled armored personnel carriers, shooting from a safe distance at every little thing. Providing support to the infantry, so to speak.
In the city, it will be about the same, only the infantry will go first, then the tanks and only then the armored boxes.
And no one will run on them in the first place with grenade launchers, because either the infantry will shoot everything (and they will try mentally), or the tankers will arrange a local apocalypse in a single settlement.
An armored personnel carrier at the forefront of the offensive is nonsense. And in defense, too, is nonsense. Its place is where size is far from important.
Well, if someone confuses armored personnel carriers and BMPT - this is his own business.
Now I will walk through the competitor.
BTR-82A. In fact, as I said in the first article, this is still the same BTR-60. The differences are minimal, and the main essence of the car has not changed over the past 70 years. They added a little armor, horsepower to the engine, and strengthened the armament. But in fact it is still the same BTR-60. With its main drawback, which cannot be eliminated without changing the essence of the machine.
We look at the photo.
Afghanistan. Armored infantry.
Syria. Armored infantry.
Donbass, Ossetia … The list can be continued, but the essence will be the same: the infantry rides on top of the armor.
Stupidity? Panache? No. The desire to live. Sniper … Well, yes. But not all of them. Machine gun? Well, yes. But not a very accurate weapon. Mine under the bottom? Well, yes…
With all three troubles, the alignment is one - you fly forward with your head and think: if you shoot, then where?
But if a mine explodes under the bottom, and the landing force is not on the armor, but inside, then Afgan's practice has proven that the armored personnel carrier turns into a good and comfortable mass grave on wheels.
And since over the past 70 years, the BTR-60 (70, 80, 82 with various letters) has not changed for the better, then here's the result. The infantry rides on top of the armor. Substituting under the bullets, fragments, but stubbornly not wanting to die in an iron can, which does not hold a mine explosion at all.
And no matter how you upgrade armored personnel carriers of this family, installing a diesel engine, adding 30-mm cannons, thickening armor, introducing anti-splinter lining and modern means of aiming and observation, soldiers on the march will invariably crawl out onto their armor.
Personal opinion: no matter how you tune the VAZ, it will be like an old basin, and it will go to a landfill in a basin. As the BTR-60 became obsolete by the 80s of the last century, no matter how much you modernize it, it will remain the old bank. A deadly old can. For the crew and troops.
But there is one more drawback. Big.
Now, everyone who served in the Union, come on, refresh your memory and do not let lies. What was the fighter dragging on himself? We do not even remember about the "harness", this thing was needed exclusively for carrying a raincoat-tent. And so the outfit is more than modest: a shovel, a flask, a gas mask, a pouch for shops, a pouch for grenades.
It was possible, with all this good, to climb into the armored personnel carrier at the very least. And get out if something happens.
Today in Ratnik it is more than doubtful. And if in the heavy equipment of a sapper … It's simply unrealistic.
In addition, this side access hole … It is so convenient to jump out of it from the side of the armored (conditionally) hull, right under the bullets …
Well, yes, but the APC floats. A very useful option, especially in Syria and Donbas. That's where buoyancy just helped out.
And a few words about the armor.
Let's all the same agree that the BTR-82 has no armor as such. The body of the vehicle can be easily pierced with a conventional armor-piercing rifle bullet. From an average distance.
But the main enemy of the armored personnel carrier is not a sniper, although he can also drink blood. And not a consumable with an RPG. The main enemy of the BTR-82 is a colleague with either a large-caliber machine gun or an automatic cannon. Or - the Arabic version - a pickup truck, into the body of which both a cannon and a machine gun are easily pushed. Fast, inexpensive, efficient.
The pickup seems to me even worse. Better visibility, speed and maneuverability will take its toll. And oligophrenic with a heavy machine gun will be a big problem. It is clear that it is the same one-time thing as a fellow RPG, but it can do things even more efficiently than a grenade launcher.
Agree, it is much easier to hit an armored personnel carrier from a machine gun or a cannon than from an RPG. And from a greater distance. And on a moving target.
So, sitting in an APC, you really should prefer three or four suicide bombers with an RPG than one psycho with a DShK in a pickup truck.
And so I turn to Boomerang. Calmly so we go around. Did you not understand that in the event of a normal war with saturation of the theater of operations with modern means of combat, these 20-30 centimeters in height are nothing?
I have such an understanding.
And at the same time there is an understanding that it is not a low silhouette that will save you from missiles and grenades, but protection. Optoelectronic detection and suppression systems, dynamic protection, active protection complexes. By the way, our potential KAZs are working out in full and soon they will install army jeeps and fuel trucks.
What can Boomerang offer in this regard?
Much really.
For example, V-shaped bottom, initial mine protection. Next up are the suspended floor and energy-absorbing chairs. All this greatly increases the chances of survival for the paratroopers. And given how popular mines, guided landmines and other IEDs are becoming all over the world, what losses regular armies are suffering from homemade products, survivability when such a charge is detonated is our everything.
Armor. The K-16 is capable of carrying armor that will withstand not only a bullet from a machine gun or a rifle, but also a larger caliber. And with additional complexes, you can talk about missiles and grenades.
Finally, the frankly poor exit to the side or top of the case is a thing of the past. And you can land like an infantry fighting vehicle, from the stern, at least minimally hiding behind the body of the vehicle.
And yes, the K-16 can provide a more spacious troop compartment. That in modern conditions is useful even in principle, because there is still a difference between conscripts of the 70-80s of the last century and today's contract soldiers. In terms of weight and size characteristics.
In general, this is not only ours. This is the case all over the world. Everywhere the army people have become … larger. Accordingly, the size of armored vehicles is also growing. Look at the same "Stryker", "Boxer", "Freccia" - well, they are not BTR-82 obviously. We can say that along with people, combat vehicles have grown, which need to transport not only people, but also ammunition and ammunition. There are never too many cartridges and grenades.
Move on. Boomerang is a very promising platform on which many useful machines can be built. From a wheeled tank (which we for some reason are skeptical about) to KShM, sanitary and other important things. This is especially true for sanitary facilities. MT-LB does not correspond to modern combat realities for a long time.
And just a few words about the ability to swim. Yes, the BTR-60 had a "trick". It was presented as something excellent, "unparalleled", as it is now fashionable to say.
It is very difficult to say how important this option is today. Somehow the crossing of the Rhine, the Oder, the English Channel faded into the background, most likely, there will be no need to fight there. Although, of course, some part of our audience, who "we can repeat", would even stand up for this.
In general, the Boomerang can float. But it is better not to engage in this anachronism, but to develop more useful engineering troops in this regard, which can transfer not only heavy equipment, but also fuel and lubricants, ammunition and other useful things needed on the battlefield over a water barrier.
Weight … Well, yes, 32 tons is not 15 for the BTR-82, but there are so many nuances at once … And the main thing is the engine. From what the BTR-82 carries, the KAMAZ G8 with 300 hp. the maximum that can still be obtained is 20-30 forces. Hence the complete "stop" for the further development of the armored personnel carrier. Or it is necessary to come up with a new engine that can fit into the modest volumes of the BTR-82.
Boomerang has a multi-fuel diesel engine YaMZ-780 with a capacity of 750 liters. sec., which is very significant, and the ratio of forces per ton of mass is even steeper than that of the BTR-82. 24 versus 20. And the Yaroslavl engine can still be twisted in terms of modifications. So the hefty K-16 is no slower than the APC.
Armament … The basic configuration is almost parity, if we compare the BTR-82AM and K-16. But if you look in perspective, then personally I really like the variation on the theme of the 57-mm "Baikal". Such a gun can not only carry pick-ups and classmates to the state of scrap metal, but even offend a tank on board.
Excessive? Come on, I don’t understand at all such a term as “excessive armor penetration”, I immediately remember the story of the 57-mm anti-tank gun Grabin, which was first removed from production for this very reason, and then urgently returned when the “Tigers” appeared.
All over the world this tendency to increase the caliber of support has been going on for a long time. And if earlier it was 20-25 mm, now it is 30 and even 40 millimeters. So 57mm is fine, and a wheeled tank with a 125mm cannon looks good too.
Here you can remember that wheeled vehicles have a higher speed, and it is not necessary to carry them on trawls, saving the resource. And the fact that the "minibus to the battlefield" as a class for the use of technology is becoming obsolete. And it is being replaced by such a heavy machine, capable not only of delivering the infantry to the battlefield, but also actually providing them with support with fire and armor.
Yes, not like a tank can do it, but not like an armored personnel carrier with its 14.5 mm non-cannon re-machine gun.
Most modern non-sofa military experts predict the war of the future as a multimedia mobile confrontation. That is, the war is not in hypothetical fields or near heights, but on the contrary, around and near cities, which will play the role of strongholds.
Just look at the recent civil wars in Syria and Ukraine. This is how everything happened there. There were practically no front lines, but mines, ATGMs, ambushes and raids became common practice. Everyday.
Accordingly, the more versatile and multifunctional a combat vehicle is, the more chances a motorized rifle unit will have to survive and win. Modularity is everything for the war of tomorrow.
And here "Boomerang" looks very nice in the perspective of the installation of KAZ, reactive armor, additional booking schemes and other things.
In general, ATGM systems have become a fairly common thing throughout the world. It is only in our country that some of the most moss-covered part of our readers are all praying on the RPG-7, and even representatives of various military groups in the Middle East have these complexes.
Moreover, the war in BV gave rise to such a phenomenon as mercenary ATGM operators. Experienced soldiers, on account of whom many destroyed tanks of various military formations. And the same "Tou", though archaism, is still better than the RPG-7. And I just keep quiet about Javelin.
Although ours are in no way inferior, and in many respects surpass foreign models. But the protection in the form of lattice screens on the same BTR-82AM looks like bed nets on tanks in Berlin in 1945.
In general, the world is actively designing and building heavy armored personnel carriers. USA, Germany, France, Italy, Turkey, Singapore, Serbia …
And who does not design - he just buys.
And we have all the "shifts to the right" and corruption scandals. And we build huge "military" churches. Instead of Boomerangs. And the panel with the top officials is ordered by the Ministry of Defense. Instead of shells.
Strange decisions, to be honest. And Russian soldiers in Syria still ride "on armor", and not inside it, because the fear of being blown up by a mine is greater than getting a bullet from a sniper. A sniper may miss, but a good land mine …
And no matter how much you tune the BTR-60, there will be no good result. Simply because the very concept of the machine is 70 years old. And this, accordingly, is not the level of today, but of the last century, alas.
But we have a crisis. We save. So that there was something to steal, what to build various dubious structures and "patriotic" parks around the country, to come up with another type of form, and so on. Well, these strange things like underwater atomic drones and other "unparalleled" incomprehensible, but not cheap gizmos.
And it’s time to think about the strategy and tactics of tomorrow and develop new technology for it. And not like we do: first something is being developed, then an understanding of how this technique can be applied begins, then talk about "huge export potential" begins, and then that's it. A curtain.
We hardly need such an approach in general, do we?
