New Ukrainian BMP. The BMP-64.

Discussion in 'Land Forces' started by Damian, Feb 20, 2012.

  1. Damian

    Damian Defence Professionals Defence Professionals

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2011
    Messages:
    4,835
    Likes Received:
    2,169
    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]

    It seems that Ukrainians despite financial problems are still working hard on new types of vehicles. Here we have BMP-64 based on T-64 tank. I must say that it looks better than the earlier prototype.

    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]

    But also this earlier vehicle was called BMPV-64, and also both vehicles are different in many ways... maybe two separated projects?
     
    W.G.Ewald and asianobserve like this.
  2.  
  3. Godless-Kafir

    Godless-Kafir DFI Buddha Senior Member

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2010
    Messages:
    5,829
    Likes Received:
    1,799
    Looks like the BMP with ERA added to it, what other specs have been improved?
     
  4. Damian

    Damian Defence Professionals Defence Professionals

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2011
    Messages:
    4,835
    Likes Received:
    2,169
    It have overall heavier protection, it is bigger, have a more powerfull engine, probably 5TDF tank engine with 700HP or 5TDFE with 900HP. It is armed with 2A42 30mm automatic cannon I also see on new version 23mm two barrel automati cannon, 30mm granade launcher maybe there is also coax machine gun, and there are also ATGM's, probably Shturm.
     
    Last edited: Feb 21, 2012
    jackhammer2 likes this.
  5. methos

    methos Regular Member

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2011
    Messages:
    798
    Likes Received:
    298
    I think that is again an attempt to get more export success, the Ukrainian Army operates currently only amphibious IFVs (the BMP series) like Russa. So unless they discard the old Soviet-legacy doctrine of land forced largely made of amphibious vehicles they probably won't buy it. Even if they would be changing their doctrines, they still need the money to buy them.
    Curiosly the Ukrainians like putting a lot of guns on a vehicle, even though some of it is redundant. If the 30 mm gun can depress and elevate to the smae degree as on the BMP-2, then the 23 mm guns are not neccessary.

    Isn't the Shturm missile longer than the ATGMs pictured?
     
  6. Koovie

    Koovie Regular Member

    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2011
    Messages:
    733
    Likes Received:
    253
    Sorry for my unknowledge, but isnt it quite dangerous for infantry to walk besides a IFV with reactive armour in a combat zone??
     
  7. sesha_maruthi27

    sesha_maruthi27 Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2010
    Messages:
    3,884
    Likes Received:
    1,568
    Location:
    Hyderabad, Andhra Pradesh(INDIA)
    I think they will try to sell this to the porkis and the chini.......
     
  8. Damian

    Damian Defence Professionals Defence Professionals

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2011
    Messages:
    4,835
    Likes Received:
    2,169
    And You think that exploding RPG will not form dangerous for dismounts shrapnels even if there is no explosive reactive armor on vehicle? Besides this there were attempts to reduce fragments generated by ERA, in fact currently there is not much explosive in ERA cassettes and in newer generation ERA only one cassette will be ignited, the one that was hit, not cassettes in near.

    Well, they have economic problems, still their offer can be atractive for countries with smaller pocket.

    Yeah, that's true, also look at turret, it seems to be unmanned type.

    Hmmm, maybe I wrongly translated something, besides this Ukrainians have severl different types of ATGM developed after SU fall. Oh wait, maybe guys from Otvaga forum were talking about turret module, not ATGM, eh, this is effects of weak Russian and not using translator to be sure. :D
     
  9. Damian

    Damian Defence Professionals Defence Professionals

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2011
    Messages:
    4,835
    Likes Received:
    2,169
    Ok I know what ATGM this vehicle it is using, they are designated Barrier.
     
  10. Kunal Biswas

    Kunal Biswas Member of the Year 2011 Moderator

    Joined:
    May 26, 2010
    Messages:
    27,614
    Likes Received:
    28,446
    Location:
    BHARAT, INDIA, HINDUSTHAN
    Its look great, But the weight..

    Its protection level is better than BMP-2, I Assume Amphibious ?



    They can change the turret with some more enhanced once..

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]
     
    kaustav2001, Apollyon and W.G.Ewald like this.
  11. Ray

    Ray The Chairman Defence Professionals Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2009
    Messages:
    43,117
    Likes Received:
    23,545
    Location:
    Somewhere
    With ERA all around in the image above, where are the portholes?
     
  12. Kunal Biswas

    Kunal Biswas Member of the Year 2011 Moderator

    Joined:
    May 26, 2010
    Messages:
    27,614
    Likes Received:
    28,446
    Location:
    BHARAT, INDIA, HINDUSTHAN
    Sir, this is a heavy class APC there are no port holes, the vehicle it self a tank modified extensively for APC use..

    This vehicle can take RPG, And AP rounds from a auto-cannons, from side and front..
     
  13. Damian

    Damian Defence Professionals Defence Professionals

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2011
    Messages:
    4,835
    Likes Received:
    2,169
    BMPT-64 (because it is correct designation what I just recently get to known) weight is approx ~45 metric tons. Maybe a bit more.

    Vehicle is protected by RHA armor + Knife ERA, so yes, protection is much higher than in BMP-2, and no, it is not amphibious, because why? It was designed to provide high protection levels, no one need amphibious IFV these days.

    BMPT-64 is using unmanned turret module that can be replaced by any other unmanned turret module. I think that manned turret also can be used.

    What do You mean? Firing ports for dismounts? Why to use them if they are weakening protection? Every modern IFV do not have firing ports, even Americans in their M2 IFV's in M2A2 and later variants deleted firing ports to enhance protection.
     
  14. Ray

    Ray The Chairman Defence Professionals Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2009
    Messages:
    43,117
    Likes Received:
    23,545
    Location:
    Somewhere
    APC or ICV may have to assault the objective mounted. It there is no portholes and if an enemy in the defence is aiming any Anti Tank weapon to knock of the ICV, then if there is a porthole, that enemy can be shot before he can fire.

    Likewise, when moving in advance, there is a possibility of enemy HHMT which are lying in wait. If observed, the portholes come into action!

    Likewise in MOUT.

    If blind, then this is not feasible.
     
    Kunal Biswas and W.G.Ewald like this.
  15. W.G.Ewald

    W.G.Ewald Defence Professionals/ DFI member of 2 Defence Professionals

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2011
    Messages:
    14,140
    Likes Received:
    8,529
    Location:
    North Carolina, USA
    Damian has given an answer to this question, but I believe tactical doctrine provides that infantry mutual support to IFV or tanks by firepower and visual interception of enemy intent. (What BG Ray said, especially in urban terrain MOUT.)
     
    Kunal Biswas likes this.
  16. Damian

    Damian Defence Professionals Defence Professionals

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2011
    Messages:
    4,835
    Likes Received:
    2,169
    In fight infantry should be outside not inside of vehicle, infantry outside is more usefull than in inside, in fact infantry should be inside only during long marches or when it is needed (artillery bombardment).

    Look at any modern IFV or APC, do You see anywhere firing ports? No, these were deleted for better protection. Firing ports can be replaced by far more effective additional RWS and vehicle own weaponary in rotating turret.
     
  17. Ray

    Ray The Chairman Defence Professionals Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2009
    Messages:
    43,117
    Likes Received:
    23,545
    Location:
    Somewhere


     
    Last edited by a moderator: May 10, 2015
    W.G.Ewald likes this.
  18. Ray

    Ray The Chairman Defence Professionals Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2009
    Messages:
    43,117
    Likes Received:
    23,545
    Location:
    Somewhere
    The ICV is not merely a battle taxi.

    Are you suggesting that it is merely an armoured vehicle to transport troops?

    Transport them and then they do what.

    While transporting them, if they are engaged, what is to be done?
     
  19. Damian

    Damian Defence Professionals Defence Professionals

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2011
    Messages:
    4,835
    Likes Received:
    2,169
    No Ray, but maybe Indians have different experiences with IFV's and APC's, however countries with far greater experience in combat with use of AFV's and in AFV's designing, had resigned from firing ports.

    Look at US, nor M2A2/M2A3 or currently designed GCV will have firing ports. SPz Puma or other modern IFV in Europe do not have firing ports. Israelis do not use firing ports on their Namer HAPC. It seems that Ukrainians and Russians also do not see a reason to have firing ports.

    In fight dismounts should get out of vehicle, IFV will then support them with it's weapons.
     
  20. Ray

    Ray The Chairman Defence Professionals Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2009
    Messages:
    43,117
    Likes Received:
    23,545
    Location:
    Somewhere
    Armored Personnel Carriers (APC)/Infantry Combat Vehicles (ICV)

    Tasks. Mechanized infantry can be used to carry out all of the tasks required of normal infantry in ATOPS when dismounted. Due to their vulnerability in close country the employment of APCs/ICVs should be restricted. However, their characteristics permit them to operate as follows:
    Rapid movement into, through or near objectives or trouble spots. APCs/ICVs enable troops to be moved speedily and with comparative immunity from distant assembly or forming-up places and be delivered, fit and fresh, in or near the trouble spot.
    Use as a fire support base. When in close contact with the enemy and when the infantry have debused, the APCs/ICVs could be used to provide supporting fire to the infantry.
    Roving operations (mobile columns). During ATOPS, units will often be responsible for security duties over large areas in which disorders may break out simultaneously in several centers. Mechanized infantry can be used to provide mobile columns to:
    Show the flag and advertise the presence of troops in certain areas.
    Suppress, by prompt offensive action, any disturbances beyond the control of the local civil authority.
    Control an area in which troops are not normally stationed.
    Be a reserve.
    Patrol an area or given stretch of road.
    Protection of sensitive points. For this task the infantry will be debussed and deployed while available APCs/ICVs can be used as follows:
    By day.
    To cover the sensitive point and/or approaches with fire.
    To patrol certain areas or stretches of road around the sensitive point.
    By night. Sited in positions to illuminate the sensitive point, or certain approaches to it, with headlights and to cover these approaches with machine-gun fire.
    Road escort duties. In large scale ATOPS, convoys, administrative echelons, or vehicles will invariably require some form of armored escort. APCs/ICVs fully or partially manned are suitable for the task.
    Shock action. The appearance of mechanized infantry with their APCs/ICVs on the scene of a disorder may in itself have the necessary salutary effect on terrorists or rioters.
    EMPLOYMENT OF FORCES
     
  21. Ray

    Ray The Chairman Defence Professionals Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2009
    Messages:
    43,117
    Likes Received:
    23,545
    Location:
    Somewhere
    The armored personnel carrier (APC) is an infantry transport vehicle with light armor and limited firepower (usually one or more machine guns). The APC is a "battle taxi." It is intended to carry soldiers to the combat zone, where they dismount to fight.

    The infantry fighting vehicle (IFV) is designed to fight with soldiers onboard, to carry the soldiers forward without dismounting them if possible, and to support them with direct fires if they do dismount. The IFV has more protection and firepower than the APC. Also known as an infantry combat vehicle (ICV) or a mechanized infantry combat vehicle (MICV).

    Gary's Combat Vehicle Reference Guide
     

Share This Page