At the end of March this year, the Uralvagonzavod Research and Production Corporation announced the completion of assembly and testing of the first batch of Terminator tank support/fire support combat vehicles. 10 production vehicles were sent to the customer and became the first examples of their type in Russian army. In the foreseeable future, new deliveries will take place, with the help of which the required fleet of equipment will be formed. Despite such successes, the BMPT project is still controversial.

The main reason for the ongoing controversy is the fact that the Terminator - like any other piece of military equipment - has not only positive features, but also disadvantages or ambiguous features. This contributes to the start of the most active discussions, and fundamental decisions of the military, such as the adoption of equipment for service, only exacerbate disputes. Let's try to figure out what claims are being made against the BMPT, and what it can say in its defense.

Are there negatives all around?

Russian projects of the Terminator family BMPT are based on fairly simple but interesting ideas. Serial tank chassis it is proposed to be equipped with a special turret and an updated weapon system. Instead of a tank gun and a set of machine guns, it is proposed to use a pair of automatic cannons, a machine gun, automatic grenade launchers and guided missiles. It is argued that such a weapon system allows a combat vehicle to fight a variety of targets, choosing the most effective in a given situation.

The first complaint about the Terminator concerns the level of protection of the vehicle and its individual components, which directly affects combat survivability. All models of the family are based on a tank chassis: for example, a production vehicle for the Russian army is built on the basis of the T-90 tank. This chassis has combined frontal armor covered with blocks dynamic protection. In general, in terms of the level of protection, the hull of such a “Terminator” corresponds to existing tanks and is capable of withstanding fire from various types, including quite powerful ones.

However, the turret of this armored vehicle, apparently, is seriously inferior in terms of protection to the hull. All weapon systems and fire control equipment are located inside armored casings, but it is obvious that they are only capable of protecting against bullets, shrapnel and small-caliber projectiles. The layout of the weapon also does not contribute to increased survivability. Gun barrels and containers with anti-tank missiles are located outside the turret. However, the new project provides additional covers to protect them.

Thus, domestic Terminators protect their crew well, but at the same time expose their weapons and ammunition to great risks. This means that under certain circumstances during a battle, an armored vehicle risks losing part of the most powerful weapons with a known decline in fighting qualities.

According to the engineers, to combat manpower or unprotected targets, the BMPT can use the PKTM machine gun and AG-17D automatic grenade launchers. Lightly armored vehicles or buildings can be attacked with two 30 mm 2A42 cannons. In case of a meeting with tanks, the Terminator carries four Ataka-T missiles. Depending on the weapon used, the armored vehicle is capable of attacking targets at ranges from hundreds of meters to 6-8 km.

The existing weapon system looks interesting and very effective, but it can also be criticized. For example, the topic of the claim could be an existing missile system. It is assumed that with its help, the BMPT will be able to help tankers in the fight against enemy tanks, destroying some targets at long distances. However, the Terminator's ammunition consists of only four missiles. Thus, after just a few launches, the armored vehicle will be able to fight the most serious threat only with the help of automatic guns, the effectiveness of which will be insufficient.

In the context of guided and artillery weapons, the BMPT is sometimes compared to modern main battle tanks, and such a comparison is usually not in its favor. So, when fighting armored vehicles, any serial domestic tank has the ability to “meet” the enemy with guided missiles, and after approaching a sufficient distance, use armor-piercing shells. In case of a collision with infantry or lightly armored vehicles, the tank has high-explosive fragmentation rounds and machine guns.

According to known data, the Terminator BMPT is equipped with a modern fire control system that meets current requirements and is built using “tank” devices. In particular, the commander and gunner have at their disposal combined sights with a day and night channel, as well as a laser rangefinder. The gunner's sight is located in front of the main part of the turret and is designed to track the front hemisphere. The commander, in turn, must use a panoramic sight.

The devices used allow you to monitor the situation, search for targets and aim the main weapon, but even here you can find weak spots. First of all, the Terminator sights have rather weak protection and therefore are unlikely to have high combat survivability. However, many other modern armored vehicles have similar problems. Another specific point is the lack of special advantages over the devices of serial tanks. As a result, the BMPT, working in the same order as tanks, will not be able to find targets earlier and faster.

This may negatively affect both the Terminators’ own work and joint actions with tanks. The fact is that modern anti-tank missile systems can have an increased firing range, exceeding the capabilities of the optics and small arms of serial tanks. In this case, their detection and destruction becomes the task of the BMPT, but their potential in this matter may be limited. Fortunately, such problems can only occur in the area of ​​detection tools. The presence of a pair of automatic cannons guarantees the successful destruction of the found complex along with crews and vehicles over a wide range of ranges.

According to different sources, BMPT in her latest version, which became the subject of a contract between Uralvagonzavod and the Ministry of Defense, is characterized by a fairly high cost - which also cannot be called an advantage. Due to the use of diverse weapons and special control systems, as well as the results of other innovations in the project, the finished Terminator costs more serial tank T-90, on the basis of which it is being built.

Strange concept

It is worth recalling that the domestic tank support combat vehicle was first introduced back in the late nineties, but for almost two decades it could not enter service with the Russian army. Until a certain time, the reason for this was the ambiguity of the concept and the lack of an appropriate tactical niche in existing strategies. In other words, the military simply could not find a place for the “Terminator” in the troops. And this can also be considered a problem with the BMPT.

For several decades, the task of infantry fire support was assigned primarily to tanks. At the same time, the soldiers, supported by the fire of armored vehicles, had to protect the tanks from tank-dangerous targets. In such a system, the task of supporting infantrymen could also be performed by infantry fighting vehicles and armored personnel carriers. The BMPT concept was based on similar ideas, but did not fit into existing views on the organization of combined arms combat. It turned out that the Terminator is a tank support vehicle, which, in turn, is designed to support infantry. It all seemed overly complicated and expensive, but it didn't seem to provide any benefits.

As a result, for a long time, BMPT projects remained without real prospects. However, by the end of the 2000s, a fundamental decision was made to adopt Terminators for service. Subsequently, new difficulties arose, which is why these plans were not implemented. The first contract for the supply of new equipment was signed only last year, and production vehicles went to the troops just a couple of months ago.

The Tank Support/Fire Support Combat Vehicle is finally entering the Russian Armed Forces and adding to the fleet of only a few units so far. At the same time, disputes about such technology do not stop. Their continuation is facilitated by the conservation characteristic features machines that, from certain points of view, may appear to be defective. However, the army has already made its choice and nevertheless decided to begin operating the unusual equipment.

Word for practice

You can consider the “pure” appearance and technical characteristics of armored vehicles as much as you like, as well as perform thought experiments, but practice will still remain the criterion of truth. And in this regard, “Terminator” has already managed to show itself with the best side. Over the course of several years, prototypes of a number of modifications underwent various tests at testing grounds. Then the improved equipment, having undergone the necessary fine-tuning, went to the real war.

In 2017, the Terminator was sent to Syria to be tested in a real armed conflict. At the same time, the technology had to solve problems that differed in some way from those included in its name. Because the Syrian army and its opponents do not carry out large-scale tank battles, The BMPT was planned to be used as a means of fire support for infantry. In practice, it has been shown that the existing combination of tank armor, cannon-machine gun and missile weapons allows you to decide wide range combat missions within a local conflict.

As far as we know, it was the results of the operation of Terminators in Syria that became one of the main reasons for the adoption of such equipment into service. In August last year, a contract appeared for serial production and supply of new combat vehicles. The first batch of such equipment was handed over to the customer at the end of March. In the near future, the remaining vehicles will be transferred to the army, and no later than 2019, the contract will be fully implemented.

The events surrounding the Terminator project, observed recently, actually put an end to many years of controversy. During testing and experimental military operation in a hot spot, it was established that such equipment is suitable for service and can be ordered for the army. Among other things, this means that various specific features of the BMPT, which could be considered disadvantages, in fact are not such. The combat vehicle meets the requirements of the battlefield and can find a place in the Russian armed forces.

Question of the future

While the Russian army was deciding whether it needed the Terminator, the designers of the Uralvagonzavod Research and Production Company did not waste time. In recent years they have offered a whole family of tank support/fire support combat vehicles. All of these projects are based on common ideas, but use different components. First of all, several Terminators differ in the type of base chassis. Some of these projects have already been implemented in metal and brought to testing, while others are still waiting in the wings.

Initially, the BMPT was developed on the basis of the T-90 main tank. After a number of changes, this particular version of the armored vehicle went into production and is being supplied to the troops. Also, a few years ago, Uralvagonzavod presented a modification of the Terminator based on the T-72 tank chassis. Despite certain changes of one kind or another, the main features of the technology remained the same. To promote the projects on the market, several prototypes were built on different chassis, regularly demonstrated at various exhibitions.

Several years ago plans were announced to create new version"Terminator". This time they plan to install a turret with a variety of weapons on an Armata-type chassis. To date, a unified tracked platform of this type has become the basis for a tank, a heavy infantry fighting vehicle and a repair and recovery vehicle. In the future, it is planned to continue the development of the family, creating new models of equipment. One of them will be a tank support/fire support combat vehicle.

Perhaps the new project of the family will provide for a significant increase in firepower. So, a pair of 30 mm cannons can be replaced by one 57 mm machine gun. This will improve the basic firing qualities of the vehicle, as well as increase the effective firing range and expand the range of targets hit. However, while this project is at early stages and the development company probably cannot yet present a prototype or its mock-up.

One way or another, the Terminator BMPT, after many years of uncertainty, was finally able to get into service with the troops. So far, the plans of the military department do not provide for the purchase of such equipment in large quantities, but in the future the situation may change. At the same time, the project is developing, which leads to the emergence of new modifications. What will be the fate of these BMPT variants is still anyone's guess. However, it is obvious that the latest successes of the existing Terminators will have a positive impact on the further development of the family.

Based on materials from sites:
http://uralvagonzavod.ru/
https://mil.ru/
http://ria.ru/
http://tass.ru/
https://rg.ru/
https://gazeta.ru/
http://gurkhan.blogspot.com/

MOSCOW, June 28 - RIA Novosti, Andrey Kots. The promising Russian tank support combat vehicle BMPT-72 "Terminator-2" was first spotted in Syria. It was demonstrated to Bashar al-Assad by the Chief of the General Staff of the Russian Armed Forces, Valery Gerasimov, during the Syrian president’s visit to the Khmeimim airbase. In the photo that went viral social networks and the media, a BMPT of the latest modification in sand camouflage, partially covered with a camouflage net, was captured. Apparently, this vehicle is part of the forces engaged in the defense of the Russian base along with the T-90 tanks.

The Syrian combat mission was the first for Terminator 2. Its predecessor was created back in 2001 and was known at that time under the designation “Object 199 “Frame”. BMPT is a vehicle with unique characteristics and very difficult fate. Long years Russian Ministry of Defense under various pretexts refused to accept it. Nevertheless, many experts believe that the appearance of a tank support combat vehicle in Syria could become a test of its professional suitability and relevance in the army. The future of the Terminator depends on how it performs in the war.

land destroyer

The experience of the war in Afghanistan and two Chechen campaigns has shown that the greatest danger to armored vehicles in combat conditions in the city and on rough terrain is posed by enemy grenade launchers and operators of anti-tank missile systems (ATGM). The BMPT was specially developed at Uralvagonzavod as a mobile and universal means of protecting armored vehicles from infantry. According to the designers, these vehicles were supposed to advance together with tanks in one order of battle and attack any target that poses a danger to their charges.

For this purpose, the BMPT was literally stuffed with a variety of weapons systems. The modern BMPT-72 in this regard is more reminiscent of a land destroyer rather than a combat vehicle. Its main armament is a twin 30-mm automatic cannon 2A42 (they are also installed on the BMP-2, BTR-90 and combat helicopters) with an ammunition load of 900 shells. In addition to the guns, the turret is equipped with a 7.62 mm PKT machine gun. On the sides of the turret there are two armored casings, inside of which are placed transport and launch containers with guided anti-tank missiles 9M120-1 or 9M120-1F/4, capable of hitting targets at distances of up to six kilometers. In addition, two AG-17D course automatic grenade launchers are mounted in the front part of the hull for firing fragmentation ammunition at infantry. This entire arsenal is installed on the chassis of the T-72 tank. The first Terminators were operated by crews of five.

Initially, it was planned to fully equip one company of the Ground Forces with early versions of the BMPT by 2010, but then the vehicle was not accepted for service. Between 2011 and 2013, a batch of 10 Terminators was delivered to Kazakhstan. Nevertheless, the Ministry of Defense was in no hurry to completely abandon the BMPT and in 2013 carried out special lesson, dedicated to its combat use, for teachers of the Ryazan Higher Airborne School. One of the main complaints of the military against the BMPT then was that the crew was too large. However, in BMPT-72 (Terminator 2) it was possible to reduce it to three people.

Review problem

However, the Ministry of Defense had other complaints about this machine. According to a member of the Expert Council of the Board of the Military-Industrial Commission of Russia, Colonel of the Reserve Tank Forces Viktor Murakhovsky, the BMPT in the Ground Forces until recently was simply not in demand.

“The main concern of a tank on the battlefield is to see the target,” the expert told RIA Novosti. “If he sees it, he will destroy it, be it a long-term firing point, an ATGM crew, an armored vehicle, a fighter with a grenade launcher. All this is hit by the tank within the line of sight range ". That is, it has enough firepower. If we look at the surveillance equipment and sighting systems on the Terminators and on the main battle tanks, we will notice that they are absolutely identical. That is, the crew of the BMPT on the battlefield will see no more than the crew of the T- " .

Viktor Murakhovsky emphasized that the appearance of Terminator 2 in Syria is quite natural. He recalled: at the beginning of 2017, the Ministry of Defense reported that 160 types of weapons, including those that had not yet passed military acceptance, were being tested in combat operations in this country. According to the expert, the BMPT-72 captured in the photograph is the only example of Terminator 2 that exists “in metal.” And the desire of the military to test it in conditions, in particular, of combat in urban areas, is completely justified. Without such exploitation, all talk about its effectiveness or ineffectiveness is only theoretical speculation.

© Photo: Telegram account of the press service of the President of Syria

© Photo: Telegram account of the press service of the President of Syria

“We have experience in the combat use of equipment with rapid-fire cannon weapons in various military conflicts,” said Murakhovsky. It's about O anti-aircraft systems"Shilka" and "Tunguska". But we must understand that small-caliber weapons, as the military says, do not destroy the target, but suppress it with fire. In some cases this is useful. However, many doubt that the BMPT will be able to replace covering infantry in the battle formations of armored vehicles. The motorized rifleman always sees more than the tanker and can react faster to any threat to the tank. In general, from the experience of my many years of service in the Ground Forces, I can say that the role of covering heavy armored vehicles is best played by artillery. We practiced tank offensive tactics under the umbrella of fragmentation shell explosions. They exploded at a height of 25-30 meters above the tank chain, covering a wide area with destructive elements. No grenade launcher would stick his head out of a trench under such a barrage. But shrapnel posed no danger to tank armor.”

The expert emphasized that one can argue as much as one wants about whether the army needs the Terminator or not, but the most important indicator is combat experience. The war will put everything in its place, he concluded.

"Terminator 3"

Whether the BMPT-72 will be accepted into service based on the results of the Syrian exam or not is an open question. But it is known for sure that the developments obtained during the creation of this technology can be used in a fundamentally new tank support combat vehicle.

Back in 2016, General Director of Uralvagonzavod Oleg Sienko told RIA Novosti that his corporation had developed a concept for the development of vehicles based on the latest Armata platform, which consists of 28 units of promising types of weapons, including air defense and heavy armored vehicles. These include the BMPT. Little is known about the future car. But it was reported, in particular, that instead of 30 mm guns, a more powerful 57 mm gun could be installed on it, as well as the latest sighting systems, protection systems, communications equipment and much more.

Original taken from andrei_bt in Tank to the rescue part 1 and 2

As for the BMPT, the vehicle is certainly interesting and would have its own niche in modern wars. But the question is what kind of BMPT.

Few people remember that they were the first to create it at the GSKB ChTZ in the 80s, about which there were a number of publications in the Bulletin of Armored Equipment.

A vehicle with two weapon options was created - Tank support combat vehicle: history and prospects. Well, it’s the 90s, everything is clear. Then UKBTM got down to business, threw out all the developments of the Chelyabinsk people and made the BMPT "Frame-99" as we know it, in my opinion much worse than in the GSKB version. It would be better to leave it as it is and not change anything, but no, so for now they can’t sell it to anyone except Kazakhstan. Although even such an BMPT is better than none. And for the future, what kind of BMPT if there is a T-15 Heavy infantry fighting vehicle T-15.

Tank to the rescue - part I

What will replace shaitan-arba in the 21st century

Sergey Maev - Chief of Operation of Arms and Military Equipment of the RF Armed Forces - Head of the GABTU (1996-2004), Colonel General. Published in the magazine http://vpk-news.ru/

In recent years, the tank support combat vehicle (BMPT) has received exceptional attention at various exhibitions and shows. A high level of security is combined with serious fire capabilities to destroy or suppress enemy personnel and other, mainly ground targets. But her future, oddly enough, is still in question.

The BMPT incorporates new design solutions based on modern scientific achievements and technological capabilities. As a fresh direction in the development of armored weapons and equipment (APT), it is of interest to both specialists in the organization of combat operations and developers of weapons and military equipment.

BMPTs were created to increase the efficiency of combat missions by infantry units and subunits, to significantly reduce personnel losses, and armored vehicles. The TTZ included capabilities that are higher than those of existing heavy armored vehicles in terms of the density of fire impact on enemy infantry at distances of up to 1,500 meters, mobility and crew protection. Design features provide better combat survivability than in a tank, and even more so in an infantry fighting vehicle.
The vehicle has all-round protection, a powerful weapon system designed to engage and suppress enemy anti-tank weapons (ATWs) in the “see-and-shoot” mode, and is capable of destroying tanks, other protected equipment and low-flying targets at a distance of up to five kilometers before they strike.
But until now, most military experts considered BMPTs solely as a means of reducing combat losses of tanks. The name of the car suggests this conclusion. Unfortunately, this was precisely the reason for the negative attitude towards the BMPT. Critics reasoned simply: what support could a vehicle with two 30 mm cannons provide to a mighty tank?

wedge wedge

The experience of using tanks in the First and especially in the Second World War showed that without infantry escort, “armor” suffers heavy losses. In this regard, the so-called tank landing appeared. He provided cover from enemy infantry armed with light anti-tank weapons and solved the problem of capturing settlements, defensive lines and objects, using tank breakthroughs in the enemy’s tactical defense zone and operations in operational depth.
The need for a comprehensive organization of interaction between tanks and infantry was clearly expressed in the order of the People's Commissar of Defense of the USSR No. 325 of October 16, 1942 “On combat use tank and mechanized units and formations." It states: the practice of the war against the German fascists showed that we had serious shortcomings in the use of tank units. During the attack, our tanks broke away from the infantry and lost interaction with them. And the cut off infantry did not support the armored vehicles with their fire and artillery fire. As a result, both tankers and infantrymen suffered heavy losses.
Now the situation is much more difficult than in World War II, which is due to the widespread proliferation of automatic small arms. The rate of fire of machine guns and machine guns increased, small-caliber guns appeared, but with the most effective impact of ammunition on targets. Automatic hand grenade launchers became standard weapons in every infantry squad, and rocket-propelled anti-tank grenades and RPGs with cumulative and high-explosive fragmentation ammunition became standard weapons for every soldier. The presence of such an arsenal of weapons on the battlefield creates unbearable conditions for the soldier, no matter what personal protective equipment you equip him with.
Deeper Character Analysis modern fighting gives full reason consider BMPTs as the main means of reducing losses, primarily of personnel of mechanized and motorized rifle formations in a clash with the enemy. But then why is the BMPT’s path to production so thorny despite its undeniable need?
The logic of opponents of the innovation is simple: what kind of tank is it if it needs cover and support? It actually worked quite often high level and determined further attitude towards development.
To find out the truth, let's return to the history of the creation of tanks. Their appearance on the fields of the First World War is not accidental and is associated with the emergence of semi-automatic and automatic small arms, primarily machine guns and mortars, the increased power of engineering barriers, and the saturation of the warring armies with artillery.
The main task of the tanks is to support the infantry in breaking through the enemy defenses. They moved ahead of the attackers, destroying barriers with cannon and machine-gun fire, and paralyzed the will of the enemy with a terrifying appearance. The effectiveness of the impact when the British broke through the German defenses on the Somme River on September 15, 1916 (32 tanks) and the Battle of Cambrai on November 20, 1917 (476 tanks) was stunning. However, this did not give the expected results. Having made a hole in the defense for 10-15 kilometers, the tanks stopped, because without the support of infantry and light artillery their offensive was bogged down. During the operational pause, the Germans counterattacked and regained lost positions.
First world war began to create tank groups. They included a heavy breakthrough tank, ammunition and fuel transporter tanks, artillery tractor tanks... By the end of 1917, the MK-9 appeared, an infantry transporter tank. In World War II, large tank formations and formations, “wedges,” appeared. They were already developing operational success in the depths of the enemy’s defense. This experience made significant changes to the Army's weapons system. An intensive search began to counteract their main striking force. The creation of a powerful anti-tank defense system came to the fore. It was based on new portable ATGMs such as “Shmel”, “Malyutka”, hand grenade launchers and rocket-propelled anti-tank grenades (from RPG-7 to RPG-23, RPG-26, RPG-28), and other means. Similar weapons also appeared among the enemy and began to be used en masse.
The concept of “tank-dangerous manpower” was born - personnel armed with modern portable ATGMs, RPGs, automatic small arms regular and large caliber, capable of effectively using it at a distance of up to 1000 meters and well protected. The threat turned out to be fatal. Possessing powerful, but essentially single-channel weapons, tanks could not effectively fight such significant and mass factor, as a “tank-dangerous manpower,” - the design features affected.
In addition, in tanks, armored personnel carriers and infantry fighting vehicles, only one crew member can fire from the main type of weapon, even if more dangerous targets are detected by others. The tanks' ammunition load is relatively small; it is irrational to use it to perform essentially artillery tasks - hitting area targets, including those saturated with poorly observable "tank-dangerous manpower."
Countering it is relevant when conducting combat operations not only with regular armies, but also with illegal armed groups, as evidenced by the experience of local conflicts in Iraq, Yemen, and Syria. The insurgents have a quarter more PTS capable of causing damage to armored vehicles than in the regular army, and their share sometimes amounted to 95 percent of all weapons available to the illegal armed formations.
In this regard, in order to effectively carry out combat missions in the forward echelon, it became necessary to have a vehicle that goes in line with the tanks (or slightly ahead), with powerful multi-channel automatic weapons, capable of taking on the destruction of the “tank-dangerous” enemy infantry, significantly reducing this the likelihood of damage to personnel and armored vehicles.

Targets and goals

The need to solve the problems of interaction between infantry and tanks in the new combat conditions led to a wonderful idea - to create a special armored vehicle. This is how the BMP appeared, the main purpose of which is the transportation of motorized rifles to the place of combat missions, increasing the mobility, firepower and security of mechanized units on the battlefield, as well as joint action with tanks, including when using weapons of mass destruction.
In the Soviet army, infantry fighting vehicles appeared in the early 60s, then they began to equip the ground forces of many countries. Infantry fighting vehicles, infantry fighting vehicles and vehicles based on them have increased the combat effectiveness of both combined arms formations and units, and formations of the types and branches of the Armed Forces, primarily due to greater mobility. BMP-1, BMP-2, BMP-3 became the basis of motorized rifle formations and units. By the end of the 80s, the USSR Armed Forces had about 20 thousand infantry fighting vehicles. They improved rapidly.

But simultaneously with infantry fighting vehicles, means of destroying them were intensively developed. An attempt to save a soldier in a lightly armored corps led to the opposite result. The hit of even one shell of a small-caliber gun, a rocket-propelled anti-tank grenade, a mine explosion or an IED caused the detonation of ammunition, a fire and the death of more than one soldier, as happens on open area and groups up to 10 people. As a result, motorized riflemen were afraid to move inside the vehicle even on the march, in the absence of the danger of shelling. When conducting hostilities in Afghanistan, in the North Caucasus, it was impossible to ensure that the infantry fighting vehicles were placed in regular places. All were on the "armor", just like during the Great Patriotic War. Especially convincingly the unsuitability of infantry fighting vehicles as a means of supporting and protecting infantry was demonstrated in Grozny in December 1994 - January 1995.
Not only modernization, but also attempts to create a new type of heavy infantry fighting vehicles to increase the protection of the crew and troops were made earlier and are quite active now. As a rule, they end in a significant increase in the weight and dimensions of the BMP, which not only reduces its main advantage - high maneuverability, but also retains the same probability of death of the motorized rifle squad inside the vehicle.
We must not forget that the saturation of the battlefield with promising, more powerful means of fire will increase and they will “get” the personnel inside the armored vehicles before approaching the attack line.
In such conditions, infantry will dismount and march over long distances, which will significantly reduce the effectiveness of motorized rifle subunits and units. With the transition to the attack, the probability of the death of the infantry fighting vehicle will be even higher due to the massive use of RPGs by the enemy on the first line of defense.
As a participant in combat operations in Afghanistan, I know that not a single operation, including the movement of convoys, fighting in the mountains or “greenery”, the provision of outposts and posts, the protection of deployment points and routes, was not carried out without the participation of armored vehicles. Then the question arose about the need to have in combat formations, in addition to standard tanks, infantry fighting vehicles and armored personnel carriers, a special highly protected, primarily against RPGs, vehicle with powerful small arms.
The modernization carried out - strengthening the protection of the T-62 and using it as a fire weapon to cover motorized rifle units - did not solve the problem. Tankers, operating at a great distance, especially in the mountains, among duvals and adobe buildings, could not timely detect and localize close combat fire weapons. The tank became a priority target for spooks. But the worst of all was the infantry fighting vehicles loaded with infantry. The defeat of one infantry fighting vehicle immediately claimed the lives of five to seven paratroopers. A striking example of heavy losses of personnel in infantry fighting vehicles is the operation of the 860th separate motorized rifle regiment in Afghanistan in 1984.
There was an urgent need for a vehicle with powerful fire weapons capable of destroying dangerous enemy manpower at a distance of up to two kilometers, and covering infantry and paratroopers with their fire. This was then the four-barreled anti-aircraft self-propelled gun ZSU-23-4 "Shilka", nicknamed "Shaitan-Arba" by dushmans.
The objects of destruction were the Mujahideen, who sat down with machine guns, machine guns, hand-held anti-tank grenade launchers, MANPADS behind duvals, in mountain crevices, karezes, buildings, greenery. Fire "Shilka" literally swept away the enemy and was the best protection for the infantry, wherever it was: in the field, in infantry fighting vehicles, armored personnel carriers, on cars. Whenever possible, the ZSU-23-4 was used everywhere: when escorting columns, conducting military operations, in the desert and greenery, guarding communications and sentry garrisons, and deploying troops. Her drawback was too weak booking.
The first experience in creating a vehicle that provides more reliable protection for the crew and support for infantry than infantry fighting vehicles was carried out at the Omsk Design Bureau of Transport Engineering.

Tank to the rescue - part II

Who stands in the way of the "Terminator"

Sergey Mayev

Chief of Operation of Arms and Military Equipment of the RF Armed Forces - Head of the GABTU (1996-2004), Colonel General

The large number of obsolete T-55 tanks available in Russia, which were converted into BTR-T (heavy armored personnel carrier), would have saturated the army with relatively inexpensive and highly protected infantry fighting vehicles.

What made them different? The BTR-T has a reinforced hull bottom to increase crew survivability in the event of an anti-tank mine explosion. This was ensured by additional armor, while the sheet was welded with an indentation; the air gap significantly reduced the effect of the blast wave. The conversion of the T-55 into the BTR-T was cheap. But the vehicle was poorly armed and did not enter service with the troops.

Out of the "frames"

In the mid-80s, taking into account the experience of operations in Afghanistan, specialists from the Military Academy of Armored Forces and the 38th Research Institute of the USSR Ministry of Defense formulated the main directions for the creation of BMPT. A concept and operational-tactical justification (OTO) for its use in tank and motorized rifle units were developed.
In 1987, the main contractor for the work was GSKB-2 of the Chelyabinsk Tractor Plant. When modeling the technical appearance of the vehicle, the designers developed several layout options that differed in the location of the engine and transmission compartment, the composition and placement of weapons.
To clarify the general technical specifications for the use of the BMPT and its technical appearance, in 1989 they tested three experimental variants when solving fire and tactical tasks, chose the optimal appearance of the vehicle, and in 1991 developed tactical and technical specifications (TTZ) for performing R&D under the code “Frame”.
Under the leadership of the chief designer of GSKB-2, Valery Vershinsky, they quickly completed technical design and created working design documentation. However, due to the difficult financial situation, work was stopped.
The next impetus for the creation of the BMPT was the results of the use of armored vehicles in the first Chechen war. When troops were brought into Grozny on December 31, 1994, to enhance the fire impact, as in Afghanistan, the Tunguska air defense system was used as part of motorized rifle units. But they turned out to be the first targets of militants with RPG-7. Naturally, the task of providing fire cover for the troops was not solved.
Again, as in Afghanistan, there was talk about the need to have vehicles with powerful fire capabilities in combat formations. The requirements were clarified, but the main ones, as before, were:

• achieving a level of crew protection and vehicle combat survivability higher than that of tanks;


• equipping with a multi-channel weapon system capable of concentrating fire and simultaneously hitting several targets in a circle;


• ensuring continuous all-round surveillance of the battlefield and effective detection of tank-dangerous targets;


• giving the vehicle a level of mobility higher than that of tanks;


• high ergonomic performance;


• the highest possible operational and production unification with tanks in service or in development.

However, an attempt to continue work at ChTZ was unsuccessful. The plant went into bankruptcy and stopped developing armored vehicles.
In 1998, R&D under the code “Frame-99” was resumed at the Ural Design Bureau of Transport Engineering (UKBTM) in Nizhny Tagil. At the technical design stage, we analyzed many schemes, both our own and predecessors, in order to select the optimal option that combines multi-channel weapons with large ammunition, vehicle protection from all angles, a highly effective search system, target detection and fire control using the base of the T-72B tank /T-90.
By the beginning of 2000, an experimental model was created. After analyzing the comments of representatives of the Ministry of Defense and specialists from other departments, the TTZ was clarified. Over the next two years, the BMPT design was significantly redesigned, and by July 2002 a prototype was produced. The design discoveries implemented in it contributed to a significant increase in combat and technical characteristics products.

Kazakhstani upgrade T-72

A distinctive feature of our design in comparison with foreign analogues is that it is not a means of transporting infantry; a squad of 10 motorized rifles is not squeezed into it, as was the case, for example, in an infantry fighting vehicle. The lack of landing forces was made up for by combat capabilities. Five firing channels ensured the simultaneous destruction of three targets at a distance of up to 1700 meters. In terms of firepower, the vehicle was superior to two motorized rifle platoons, the BMPT was capable of hitting not only enemy infantry, but also armored vehicles, long-term fire installations, shelters and low-flying air targets thanks to the gun elevation angle of 450. The large arsenal ensured the conduct of combat operations for a long time. Low profile hull, uninhabited fighting compartment create a level of security and mobility higher than that of a tank. Four optical observation and aiming channels, all-round panorama, high speed rotation of the turret, constant readiness to fire with automatic weapons, the possibility of long-term non-stop firing - all this guarantees the timely detection and defeat of the enemy’s “tank-dangerous” manpower. Range aimed shooting from a cannon with an armor-piercing projectile - up to 2000, high-explosive fragmentation - up to 4000, course automatic grenade launcher - up to 1700 meters. Two cannons and machine guns installed in the conning tower ensure all-round destruction of manpower, armored targets and well-protected shelters. The elevation angle of the weapon unit at 450 allows you to shoot at targets on the upper floors of buildings or at commanding heights in the mountains. Four launchers of supersonic ATGM "Attack" with a highly protected floor from interference automatic system guidance in the information laser control field have a firing range of up to six kilometers and penetrate up to 1000 millimeters of homogeneous armor. The radius of complete destruction of a high-explosive fragmentation grenade is seven meters.
The car successfully passed state tests in 2006. The State Commission was headed by the Deputy Commander-in-Chief of the Ground Forces, one of the most authoritative experts on combat operations in local conflicts, who was wounded twice in Afghanistan and received the “Gold Star” of the Hero Russian Federation for the leadership of the counter-terrorist operation in the North Caucasus, Colonel General Vladimir Bulgakov. Despite this, no decision was made to equip the Ground Forces with BMPTs.
UKBTM designers continued to improve the BMPT, firmly convinced of its necessity. A new requirement has been added - to use BMPT to fight terrorist groups. To do this, it is necessary to clarify the conditions for combat use and adjust the design of the vehicle, the sighting and observation system, the fire control system, remove the task of destroying armored targets, and adapt the BMPT to close-range combat against infantry equipped with small arms and grenade launchers.
A further impetus for the development of BMPT for NPO Uralvagonzavod, as in its time with the T-90 tank, was the signing of an agreement for the supply of BMPT abroad.
Tests carried out by specialists from the Kazakh army to assess the combat capabilities of the vehicle both against regular troops and illegal armed groups confirmed its uniqueness, versatility and high efficiency. In terms of combat potential, it replaces 2-2.5 infantry fighting vehicles or 3-4 armored personnel carriers. According to one of the leaders of the Ministry of Defense of Kazakhstan, the BMPT is a universal vehicle for supporting personnel of motorized rifle and tank units in offensive and defensive operations.
It came to the signing of a bilateral agreement on the creation of the BMPT. At the same time, they decided to develop a cheaper option based on the T-72 tanks, which are available in sufficient quantities in the Republic of Kazakhstan. As a result, UKBTM created the BMPT-72, which later received the name “Terminator-2”. The peculiarity is that the modification of the T-72 tank is minimal. This and a number of other measures can significantly reduce the cost of the vehicle and increase its combat effectiveness. The only doubt that arises is that the design of Terminator-2 lacks two installations of automatic grenade launchers, located in the bow of the vehicle’s hull on the right and left sides.

Together with "Solntsepek"

Another direction in the development of BMPT is expanding the scope of combat use. At the beginning of the 21st century, a new threat appeared: strike forces of terrorist groups. To combat them, UKBTM proposed a simplified version of the BMPT - BKM-1 and BKM-2 (counter-terrorism combat vehicle). When creating them, the designers proceeded from the conditions of use, which made it possible to abandon expensive fire control systems, surveillance devices, target reconnaissance and aiming. The weapon system is also being optimized. At the same time, protection for combat in urban environments is being improved. The vehicle has the ability to covertly approach terrorist positions and deliver a powerful strike from the spot, from cover. It has a smaller fuel supply, which means higher fire safety and more ammunition. To clear debris, obstacles or barricades, a bulldozer blade is installed.
Of course, for effective use vehicles in the combat formations of the Ground Forces require a proven regulatory and methodological base. Based on the experience of Afghanistan and other local conflicts, specialists from the Military Academy of Armored Forces named after. R. Ya. Malinovsky, the 38th Research Institute of the Ministry of Defense and the State Military Training Institution of the Ground Forces worked out methods of using BMPTs and identified a niche in the organizational structure of motorized rifle and tank units. It was planned to create motorized armored groups consisting of tanks, infantry fighting vehicles and infantry fighting vehicles. Tanks and BMPTs are on the front line of combat contact with the enemy, destroying firing points and strongholds. BMPs with infantry are in the second echelon, holding the taken lines.
The Commander-in-Chief of the Ground Forces, Army General Aleksey Maslov, back in 2008, outlined the place of the BMPT in the structure of the Ground Forces and the procedure for its combat use: “Various options for using these vehicles are being studied, the need for the appearance of which in the combat formations of troops has been long overdue. Either as the third vehicle in each tank platoon, or as a separate unit supporting the operations of the tank battalion. Previously, protection of tanks from destruction by anti-tank weapons on the battlefield was provided by motorized rifle landings. Now this task will be performed by a BMPT armed with two 30-mm cannons, two automatic grenade launchers and a machine gun."
The most effective, in my opinion, option for using BMPTs was demonstrated during exercises by the armed forces of Kazakhstan. There, the heavy flamethrower system TOS-1A “Solntsepek” and BMPT were introduced into the special unit. Acting in tandem, the Solntsepek burned out the enemy, and the BMPT was followed by a subsequent “cleansing” of strong points. Motorized rifle units occupy and hold areas of terrain or specific objects.
It would seem that there are more than enough arguments in favor of equipping the RF Armed Forces with a tank support combat vehicle. Why is there still no BMPT in the army?
Probably, everything was decided by the position of the ex-chief of the General Staff of the Russian Armed Forces Nikolai Makarov. The previous leadership of the Ministry of Defense did not find a place for the BMPT in the army structure.
Previous ministers of defense and chiefs of the General Staff - Pavel Grachev, Igor Rodionov, Viktor Dubynin, Anatoly Kvashnin, active participants in combat operations and leaders of the Armed Forces during the creation of the BMPT, were in favor of the vehicle being adopted not only by the Ground Forces. Let me remind you that the decision to create the BMPT took place in the wake of the events in Afghanistan and the Chechen Republic, when it became obvious that this vehicle was extremely necessary for the warring units. But if real experience, obtained in hot spots, is not an argument, then, as a rule, they turn to scientific research that determines the nature of combat operations and weapons systems necessary to achieve a given result. Unfortunately, this has not happened yet either.

After modification - robot

Based on many years of research, military scientists and specialists developed the Concept of Tank-Armored Infantry Integration, in which they made recommendations for changing the organizational structure of the troops. In particular, it is proposed to move from a purely tank unit to integrated armored units and units of the Ground Forces. The project has been completed and proposed for consideration by the author of the fundamental work “Tanks” (2015), Major General Oleg Brilev. Doctor of Technical Sciences, professor, he devoted his entire life to research into the creation and combat use of tanks. The concept is based on the theory of combat and military-economic efficiency as the main tool used in decision-making for equipping the Armed Forces with types and types of weapons and military equipment. It is supported by mathematical analysis of combat operations and data from modeling the process of creating weapons and military equipment. The necessary result achieved by a combination of costs incurred during the combat use of a certain amount was also taken into account. various types Armored vehicles, with their properties. As a result, the combat value of each model in the general grouping of armored weapons and equipment was determined. The researchers came to an unequivocal conclusion: it is advisable to combine various types of armored vehicles with their combat characteristics and properties, determined by a quantitative ratio in the structure of the unit and units of the Ground Forces.
The theory of combat and economic effectiveness makes it possible to determine the optimal combination of types and types of weapons and military equipment in the structure of the Ground Forces to achieve maximum or acceptable combat results in actions against various enemy groups, depending on terrain conditions, the qualitative and quantitative ratio of the warring parties. Instead of purely tank units, several options are offered for creating integrated units (company, battalion) operating against heterogeneous enemy forces with the task of achieving maximum success.
The need to have an armored vehicle that differs in combat properties from a tank in the front line of defending or advancing tank units was also confirmed by another prominent scientist in the field of tank force tactics, Doctor of Military Sciences, Professor of the 38th Central Research Institute of the Russian Defense Ministry Nikolai Shishkin. In his work “Tanks in Local Wars and Armed Conflicts,” he writes that the BMPT, operating in the battle line ahead due to greater stealth and special weapons, makes it possible to maintain interaction with tanks and prevent their destruction, starting from the line of transition to the attack, as well as when breaking through fortified positions on the front line and in the depths of the enemy’s defense.
In this regard, it must be added that powerful protection from all angles makes the BMPT a hard-to-hit target, which allows it to operate effectively in conditions of massive use of anti-tank weapons. The presence of large ammunition for the 30-mm automatic cannon (850 rounds) makes it possible to fire for a long time at a high rate (600-800 rounds/min) and creates a high-explosive fragmentation field that significantly exceeds the capabilities of the Shilka self-propelled gun.
It is also worth noting that the design of the BMPT allows, with minor modifications, to make the vehicle a fully robotic combat system.
Remotely controlled remote weapons of the BMPT combat module are the first step towards creating a robotic “Terminator” based on it. The development of such a machine will make it possible to remove people from the front line and thereby significantly reduce losses among personnel.
Today the problem is no longer whether an BMPT is needed or not. A delay in its adoption and delivery to the troops could result in a lot of blood shed by our tank crews and motorized riflemen on the battlefield.

This unofficial name was given to the tank support combat vehicle (BMPT).

According to the military, the combat effectiveness of one BMPT is superior to two motorized rifle platoons - 6 infantry fighting vehicles and about 40 personnel. The latest development of the Ural Design Bureau of Transport Engineering and the Nizhny Tagil Engineering Enterprise is completing the stage of military testing this year, said Nikolai Kovalev, deputy head of the Main Armored Directorate (GABTU) of the Ministry of Defense.

The introduction of BMPT into a tank battalion will increase the unit's effectiveness by 30%, says the general. - This vehicle can fire simultaneously at three targets on the battlefield.

The concept of creating a tank support combat vehicle did not appear in Russia because of a good life. The military remembers the tragic assault on Grozny on the night of January 1, 1995, when in cramped city blocks on the outskirts of railway station The 131st Maikop Brigade was shot almost point-blank, and about 50 tanks and combat vehicles were burned. The assault on the city literally choked on the blood of our soldiers and officers. Thrown into battle without proper reconnaissance of the area, without the escort of helicopters or motorized rifles, they are formidable combat vehicles on the cramped city streets they found themselves easy prey for Chechen grenade launchers.

The military has drawn conclusions: tanks are no longer allowed into cities alone. Self-propelled vehicles were adapted as accompanying vehicles anti-aircraft installations"Shilka". Four barrels, high rate of fire. You can suppress a firing point. However, "Shilka" is poorly protected, since it was never intended for offensive operations, and That's why has no armor. In addition, it does not have the main thing - the ability to independently detect targets and destroy them at maximum range.

The Ural Transport Engineering Design Bureau proposed their own recipe for a tank support combat vehicle. The serial chassis of the most modern Russian T-90 tank is equipped with a twin block of two automatic 30-mm 2A42 cannons - 850 rounds of ammunition, 4 launchers of Shturm-S guided anti-tank missiles with cumulative or thermobaric warheads, the latest Kord machine gun. - 2000 rounds of ammunition and 2 automatic 30-mm grenade launchers AG-17D. The result is "The Terminator". The vehicle is capable of overcoming 3 m long ditches and 1.5 meter walls at a speed of 60 km/h. It can equally easily “reach” a tank or a “super-protected” long-term enemy firing point at a distance of up to 5 thousand meters, and clear a 3-kilometer square of terrain from any enemy personnel. In general, a real combine for the battlefield will "pick up" everything that is ahead, clearing the way for tank columns. As the military says, in the field one BMPT will be used with two tanks. There are two BMPTs and one tank in the city.

During the demonstration of the BMPT at the exhibition in Nizhny Tagil, representatives of the Israeli delegation became interested in it. And they even spoke in terms of the immediate purchase of a batch of BMPTs to support the Israeli Merkava tanks, which are poorly adapted for operations in urban conditions, participating in the cleansing of Palestinian settlements. True, at the last moment the Israelis changed their minds - they decided that they themselves would be able to develop their own analogue of the BMPT. So far we haven't been able to. But the Russian Ground Forces will be the first to receive vehicles capable of solving tasks of any complexity on the battlefield.

Terminators may enter service with the Russian army.
This is the name of the modernized tank support combat vehicle.

Object 199 "Frame" (also commonly known as common name“Tank support combat vehicle”, in the media and even on the official website of UVZ often appears under the unofficial nickname “Terminator”) - a Russian tank support combat vehicle: a combat vehicle designed to operate as part of tank formations in order to destroy enemy tank-dangerous means - for effective suppression of enemy personnel equipped with grenade launchers, anti-tank systems, and small arms; There is also the ability to hit tanks, infantry fighting vehicles, bunkers, bunkers and other highly protected targets on the move and from the spot.

Object 199 (BMPT "Ramka" / "Terminator") - a Russian combat vehicle for fire support of tanks - has no analogues in the world.
Its purpose is to support tanks in urban combat.

The development of the BMPT began back in the 80s and ended in 2006.
Since then, the BMPT has undergone many dramatic changes. The final version was created on the basis of the T-90A tank and is equipped with the new generation Relikt VDZ.

It is worth noting that the name “Terminator” is not official, but has become so commonplace that it is mentioned much more often than “Frame”, and even on the official website of Uralvagonozavod it is listed as “Terminator”.

Development of the BMPT ended at the end of 2006. Despite official statements that one company will be created by 2010 ground forces, fully equipped with new vehicles, in 2009 the adoption of the BMPT into service by the Russian Armed Forces did not take place, mass production was not started.
Now a number of BMPTs are in the Ryazan school, but are in service only in the army of Kazakhstan.
After the IDEX-2013 exhibition, Saudi Arabia became interested in it.

The creation of the BMPT was preceded by the development of specialized combat vehicles - “tanks for border troops.” The design of the vehicle was carried out at the Federal State Unitary Enterprise "Ural Design Bureau of Transport Engineering" from 1998 to 2000 with a guided weapons complex with the Kornet missile, and since December 2000 - with a guided weapons complex with the Ataka missile.

The military was forced to begin developing the BMPT by changing combat conditions.
Previously, we naively prepared for some kind of global confrontation between tank armadas, but now life forces us to fight with partisans or militants. We remember very well the losses of tanks and infantry fighting vehicles suffered by Russian troops during the assault on Grozny in 1995. When any building serves as ideal cover for a grenade launcher, the tank will not last long. This means that we need to give him something to help him that would quickly and often destroy the walls of houses, turning the enemies hiding behind them into mincemeat.

It would be nice to also cover this “something” with reliable armor. Based on these considerations, the designers created the “Terminator” based on the famous T-90 tank, equipping it with a multi-fuel engine capable of a thousand “horses”.
It is impossible to escape from the “Terminator” even over potholes: a car rushing at a speed of 60 km/h jumps over three-meter ditches and easily crawls over one and a half meter walls!

The BMPT is designed to replace motorized rifle troops on the battlefield, which protects tanks from being hit by enemy anti-tank weapons. The BMPT is designed to effectively suppress enemy personnel equipped with grenade launchers, anti-tank systems, and small arms; It is also possible to hit tanks, infantry fighting vehicles, bunkers, bunkers and other highly protected targets with supersonic laser-guided Ataka anti-tank missiles from the Ataka-T KUV, as well as destroy helicopters and low-flying aircraft.

One BMPT "Terminator" is superior in firepower to two motorized rifle platoons - 6 infantry fighting vehicles and about 40 personnel. According to experts, there should be one such vehicle for every three tanks (platoon).

The Ataka missile in a tube-container installed on the launcher allows the BMPT to fire missiles after crossing a water obstacle up to 5 m deep along the bottom.

Basic weapons consist of:
— two 30-mm automatic guns 2A42 (900 rounds);
— 7.62 mm PKTM machine gun (2000 rounds);
— ATGM type “Attack” or “Cornet” (four missile launchers on the turret launcher);
— two AGS-17 grenade launchers (300 rounds in a single belt for each) in the fender niches.

The power of the Terminator's weapons is crushing: the BMPT can fire in a minute:
- nine hundred 30-mm shells,
- six hundred 30-mm grenades,
- two thousand 7.62 mm bullets.

The BMPT's ammunition capacity is enough to burn out every living thing in an area of ​​3 square meters. km.
Needless to say, BMPT missiles penetrate the armor of any tanks and concrete bunkers at a distance of up to 5 km, and can also shoot down a helicopter and even a low-flying enemy aircraft. Well, the AG-17D grenade launchers with a mounted grenade flight path ensure the destruction of targets in trenches in a zone of up to 1 km.

The Terminator BMPT has a modern, advanced automatic fire control system (FCS) "Frame". The gunner's sight includes:
- thermal imaging channel,
- optical channel,
- ground control equipment for the ATGM laser-beam guidance channel,
- laser rangefinder.

The commander's panoramic sight has a 360° field of view.
The panoramic sight has optical, low-level television and laser rangefinder channels. If necessary, the commander can display the image of the gunner's thermal imaging sight on his video device.

The automated fire control system has a digital ballistic computer, a set of automatic sensors for firing conditions and an automatic target tracking system, which significantly simplifies and increases the efficiency of using guided weapons.
Control of the weapon complex is duplicated - the commander has the ability to conduct effective fire from the entire weapon complex located in the turret. The workplaces of automatic grenade launcher operators are equipped with Agat-MP stabilized sights (day/night). The BMPT weapon system creates high-density fire and is capable of attacking up to four targets simultaneously.

Armor protection - rolled and cast steel and multi-layer combined, projectile-proof, with dynamic protection.
The frontal hull of the BMPT has protection equal to the main tank T-90, however, unlike the T-90, which provides protection against anti-tank weapons within a heading angle of ±35°, the BMPT provides reliable protection against close-in infantry anti-tank weapons within 360°.

Moreover, when using additional fabric screens with elements of dynamic protection, installed in the conditions of the mass use of anti-tank melee weapons, maximum protection is provided even during normal shelling. The weapons unit is mounted on a support on the rear of the turret. All ammunition has been moved beyond the reserved volume.

The "Terminator" has a light indication of the direction and an audible alarm about the exposure of the BMPT to laser means and automatic counteraction to this. The machine is equipped with a filter-ventilation unit (FVU), which pumps purified outside air into the machine. Due to the excess pressure, toxic substances, radioactive dust, etc., do not get inside, even if the machine is not airtight. There is an electromagnetic protection system that provides neutralization (premature detonation) of anti-tank mines or land mines with radio and magnetometric fuses.

By the way, being a completely new type of weapon, the Terminator BMPT is not subject to reductions under the CFE (Treaty on Conventional Armed Forces in Europe). This class of equipment simply did not yet exist at the time the contract was drawn up, because the Terminator is neither a tank nor an armored vehicle. This means that no one will forbid us to stock up on more of them.

Main characteristics:
Type................................Combat Tank Fire Support Vehicle
Lineup...................Classic
Weight........................... 48 tons
Crew........................5 people
Length........................6960 / 7200 mm 1
Height........................3440 mm
Width........................3800 mm
Suspension type............ Torsion bar, individual
Gearbox type........................Automatic
Engine make.........V-92S2
Engine type...............Diesel, multi-fuel
Power...................1000 hp
Engine capacity.........38880 cm3
Number of cylinders.........12
Cruising range......550 km 2
Max. speed...............50 / 65 km/h 3
Fuel consumption, max.....~2.5 / 4.5 l/km 4
Prev. ditch...............2.7 m
Prev. wall................0.85 m
Prev. ford.............. 1.2 / 1.8 / 5 m 5
Type of armor......................steel, combined, projectile-proof
DZ type........................VDZ, "Relic"
Type KAZ........................KOEP "Shtora-1" (irradiation sensors only)
Steel equivalent......800-1000 / 1300-1600 mm 6
Gun brand...................2 x 2A42 7
Gun type......................Small-caliber rifled automatic gun
Gun caliber.............30 mm
Availability of KUV...................Yes, "Ataka-T"
Types of ammunition......OFS, SBO, ATGM
Ammunition...................900 shells, 4 ATGMs
Rate of fire........300 / 800 shot. / min 8
Gave. shooting........................4 - 1.5 / 8 km 9
Add. armament .......... 12 x 78 mm 902B "Tucha" smoke grenade launchers, 1 x 7.62 mm PKMT machine gun and 2 x 30 mm AGS-17 "Flame" automatic grenade launchers

Video: