Squaddie noob wagon, mostly easy kills since people use it to get to high BR matches without grinding their way there, but less than with paypig vehicles.
Probably wouldn't want to be inside since the BMP chassis tends to be a death trap but going up against it is probably a pants shitting moment if you're not dug in.
Still a shitty cramped deathbox that soldiers refuse to enter and would rather stay outside, where they can get blown up by artillery and grenades.
The Kornet is good tho. Although putting it on a BMP makes the Kornet worse rather than improve the BMP.
It would unironically be pretty good but the issue is that they are so expensive to produce that they couldn't be manufactured in large enough numbers. The other issue is that they are essentially worthless during mud season.
For mud season you have stuff like mtlb and m113 and then for offensives during favorable weather conditions you bring out the Namer. Whats the issue with this?
If you need a massive amount of APC's in the hundreds or the thousands basically nobody except the US could afford to field a huge number of namers.
1 month ago
Anonymous
Then why are we talking about survivability? You cant have both numbers and survivability unless your like you said the US.
1 month ago
Anonymous
Survivability is kind of a relative concept for APC's. The only thing that is required of APC's like the VAB, Patria XA-variants, Stryker etc. is that they are mine resistant, small arms resistant and if you have near misses from artillery the entire vehicle doesn't disintegrate. If you want vehicles for straight up assaulting positions or something similar you get an IFV / AFV. The Israelies are in a slightly different situation because they are in a super arid environment with a lot of money and low troop counts and they don't need to drive very long distances.
1 month ago
Anonymous
as seen in ukraine the role of an apc with almost no firepower can easily be replaced by cheaper and faster mraps. so really going forward any future apc should be a more safe version (heavy) with improved firepower. like uhhh a namer
1 month ago
Anonymous
>should be a more safe version (heavy) with improved firepower. like uhhh a namer
Which gets disabled by one mine, so worthless. Better to have 3 Patrias than one Namer
It's a better BRD than a BRD it can lay a lot of hate and discontent while being pretty mobile and relatively cheap.. Just not a very good 21st century IFV
Eh, that's pushing it. BMP-1 could be said to be revolutionary but Bradley, Marder etc. were all in service by then as well. BMP-2 was comparable to its contemporaries but not revolutionary
You monkey nagger the Bradley wasn't fielded until 1981 and the BMP-1 was fielded in 1966.
The Soviets totally outmatched the US in armor and equipment until the 1980s when they shot light years ahead
If you read what I replied to it clearly is saying BMP-1 could be called revolutionary, but by the time of the BMP-2's introduction Bradley and Marder were a thing you absolute mong
He is comparing the BMP-2 to the Bradley, the BMP-1 was revolutionary and central to soviet doctrine, but the BMP-2 is inadequate relative to the NATO IFVs in its capacity as an APC.
The US was busy sabotaging its own projects with fucking retarded missiles and other fuckups like the MBT-70, and cancelling the T92 because of random extra requirements. Every tank since the M26 (which debatably every cold war US MBT was based on) was a stopgap up to the M1. The US was however able to use the British 105mm, benefit from British APDS and LRF research, British development of the commander Hunter-Killer system, and British two plane stabilisers, which it was implementing in incrimental upgrafes. Plus the British reclined driver seat and British chobham composite (it did attempt composite but the silicon panels were a failure) allowing it to develop the M1, and the German 120mm. Credit where its due, the US did actually first develop and field thermals for tanks, which is something the Soviets never managed. Ultimately yes, the US caught up in the 1980s, but it was only really somewhat behind from 1966-1980. The Soviets also werent light years ahead of NATO as a whole, and NATO was always going to operate together, at least in Germany. The 105 and superior systems on the upgraded M60s could've dealt with the majority of soviet tanks, which were T-55s+62s and the early T-72s. Germany has the marder in 1971, so the soviets are really ahead with the T-64s with their early composite resistant to even the 105 at most ranges, and APFSDS which could go through any NATO tank up until 1976, albeit Britain had the 120mm Chieftain, which could still frontally penetrate a T64. There's also America's historical neglect of ground forces in favour of air power, in which it was ahead, but thats semantics.
the fact that its a squadron vehicle so any little old timmy can buy it straight up is annoying as fuck, well at least i imagine for ussr mains. the whole 8-10.0 range must suck as its nothing but premium 1-2 death max leavers lmao
> The Syrians were not satisfied with their BMP-1s – they praised it for its speed and maneuverability but found the 2A28 "Grom" gun effective against enemy tanks only at ranges of less than 500 m. The 9M14M "Malyutka" ATGM was hard to aim from inside the vehicle while on the move. > Israeli tank brigades suffered very high losses during the Syrian offensive. The Israelis noted that the "Malyutka" ATGMs, (including those launched from BMP-1s), were deadly against their tanks (the Sho't, the M48A3 Patton and the M60A1). The Israelis were able to destroy or capture 40–60 Egyptian BMP-1s and 50–60 Syrian BMP-1s out of a total of more than 200 destroyed or captured Arab APCs and IFVs.[18] > Between 1992 and 1994 Azerbaijan lost 38 BMP-1s and Armenia lost from 51 to 53 IFVs in battles.[54] For that conflict, Nagorno-Karabakh Armenians made an interesting field modification. Six 9M14M "Malyutka" ATGMs were fitted on an elevatable mount from the 9P122 tank destroyer on the top of the turret at the rear.[29]
That’s just for the BMP-1. I would imagine more ATGM kills occurred in African wars and other Middle East conflicts. Given the changes in technology, I would imagine that BMPs with ATGMs be less important as time drags on, and with how bad the designs are but it’s still an armored vehicle with a big gun and the ability to mount/shoot missiles so Russia and Ukraine will use the for years to come.
The BMP is like a Bradley if you made the ergonomics dogshit, downgraded the optics to either a garbage level or just mostly blurry depending on the variant and the protection was lackluster. There's honestly nothing that special about the BMP except for the fact that you have to be a midget or an amputee to fit into one with any degree of comfort.
Wait, wasn't that one of the things that somehow didn't kill Nucking Futz?
Like he was thrown for metres when it launched a rocket at him but he survived somehow, and there's an awkward interview with him and Operator Starsky where it quickly becomes evident Futz's level of autism makes him so invulnerable, but socially impossible.
>pros >you think you're suppressing a small recon squad, but actually suppressing a whole company hiding in the area that you don't know about. >looks good on propaganda videos >dakka
>cons >instead of spending maybe 5 rounds on each target with a properly stabilized gun and optics, you have to spend +/- 30 rounds. >you get droned or arty'd because you're a big metal bawks in the middle of an open elevated field making noise >one barrel isn't enough dakka
The only reason this happens is because the firerate is unironically too high. Hence the BMP-3 onwards they use a slower firing gun. Specifically had a damn cage on the muzzle of the BMP3's 30mm to act as a sort of guiderail to make damn sure the gun didn't shake even though it was also slower firing.
The BMP-2's gun can be set for a slower or even semi auto fire rate as well, you're not supposed to mag dump on targets unless they're at very close range.
>GRAU in turn had no lighter, automatic cannon available and did not oversee any institute or bureau that would be capable of designing one, as most were disbanded in the early 60’s. Automatic guns were only developed by the Soviet air force and the navy, but those fell under different government officials, not affiliated with GRAU. What made the matter even worse was the fact that certain GRAU generals „fell in love“ with the 2A28 caliber, promoting it as „the most powerful gun ever mounted on an IFV“. When actual officers in charge of these vehicles complained about the gun’s poor performance and accuracy, they were accused of poor maintenance and insufficient training with all the complaints being silently swept under the rug. But the rumors slowly made their way up the Soviet ranks and in the end, GBTU forced the issue by organizing official shooting trials at Kubinka proving grounds. A BMP-1 was to fire against an obsolete T-55 tank at 800 meters (the target was not moving). And the result of the trials? Of 50 shots, only 17 did hit the tank - others were carried off their trajectory by the wind. The shells that did hit made their impacts under different angles – some ricocheted, some did not, but in the end, not a single shell managed to penetrate the vehicle. After the trials, a driver just drove off with the undamaged tank – a fitting testament to the inefficiency of the Grom gun.
I never spend points on BTRs/BMPs. MTLBs for everyone. You can get a recon tank / Stryker for 25pts instead.
MTLBs get saved up the entire game and then go on the front line push of enemy town to take ATGMs if the opponent is too lazy to micro. If they do micro, they just stand there in front of town and pop away at ATGM teams while more MTLBs pull up with Spetz hit crew.
At 5 pts a piece, I like to pretend the MTLBs are remote controlled.
Trying to cram a lot of upgrades into an outdated mass-warfare chasis, with low emphasis on surviveability, which is no longer sufficient for a modern combat environment with massive engagement distances and a high saturation of readily avaliable armour killing/damaging weapons. Still a decent weapon in many respects, scary for an infantry platoon to engage, at least at close range, but not a great APC at all. Surviveability is way too bad, probably safer to be in an armoured car.
what are the russian's analogue of infantry AT weapon systems anyway?
like what are the russian Javelins and NLAWs and how effective are they/how well do they use them?
Russia likes to use a large variety of AT weapons ranging from ROG-7s with various types of warheads, disposable AT rockets or thermobaric launchers, and different types of ATGMs.
Russian ground doctrine has always been a ground focused one so often vehicles from the BTR, BMP, or BMD families will accompany infantry in addition to main battle tanks.
All that aside, I’d say the Kornet is Russia’s best analogue to the Javalin or NLAW.
>I’d say the Kornet is Russia’s best analogue to the Javalin or NLAW.
kornet is a heavy tripod mounted ATGM, its closer to the TOW missile
the javelin is a shoulder fired missile usually held at the platoon level, or even squad level
the closest russian equivelant is an RPG, which is not guided but is held at the squad level
Squaddie noob wagon, mostly easy kills since people use it to get to high BR matches without grinding their way there, but less than with paypig vehicles.
it has 4 missiles ready that can launch on a move
Undertiered.
better decor than garden gnome
war thunder fantasy
Probably wouldn't want to be inside since the BMP chassis tends to be a death trap but going up against it is probably a pants shitting moment if you're not dug in.
Still a shitty cramped deathbox that soldiers refuse to enter and would rather stay outside, where they can get blown up by artillery and grenades.
The Kornet is good tho. Although putting it on a BMP makes the Kornet worse rather than improve the BMP.
Speaking of the bmp how has the Performance of the Stryker and other donated apcs been in Ukraine in comparison?
Patria was described as best APC for this war
>stops moving only after three mines
>mines do nothing to crew, at most mild concussion
not bad for a 30 year old cheap and cheerful apc
Namer is obviously the best apc for this war retard
It would unironically be pretty good but the issue is that they are so expensive to produce that they couldn't be manufactured in large enough numbers. The other issue is that they are essentially worthless during mud season.
For mud season you have stuff like mtlb and m113 and then for offensives during favorable weather conditions you bring out the Namer. Whats the issue with this?
If you need a massive amount of APC's in the hundreds or the thousands basically nobody except the US could afford to field a huge number of namers.
Then why are we talking about survivability? You cant have both numbers and survivability unless your like you said the US.
Survivability is kind of a relative concept for APC's. The only thing that is required of APC's like the VAB, Patria XA-variants, Stryker etc. is that they are mine resistant, small arms resistant and if you have near misses from artillery the entire vehicle doesn't disintegrate. If you want vehicles for straight up assaulting positions or something similar you get an IFV / AFV. The Israelies are in a slightly different situation because they are in a super arid environment with a lot of money and low troop counts and they don't need to drive very long distances.
as seen in ukraine the role of an apc with almost no firepower can easily be replaced by cheaper and faster mraps. so really going forward any future apc should be a more safe version (heavy) with improved firepower. like uhhh a namer
>should be a more safe version (heavy) with improved firepower. like uhhh a namer
Which gets disabled by one mine, so worthless. Better to have 3 Patrias than one Namer
a massive lumbering target with low strategic and operational mobility?
good thermals ok gun ok atgms horrible crew ergonomics overall great tank for killing something then getting killed
It's a better BRD than a BRD it can lay a lot of hate and discontent while being pretty mobile and relatively cheap.. Just not a very good 21st century IFV
>BMP-2
Revolutionary in 1980
>BMP-2M
Outdated in 2008.
Eh, that's pushing it. BMP-1 could be said to be revolutionary but Bradley, Marder etc. were all in service by then as well. BMP-2 was comparable to its contemporaries but not revolutionary
You monkey nagger the Bradley wasn't fielded until 1981 and the BMP-1 was fielded in 1966.
The Soviets totally outmatched the US in armor and equipment until the 1980s when they shot light years ahead
Why do you lie that off the top of your head?
If you read what I replied to it clearly is saying BMP-1 could be called revolutionary, but by the time of the BMP-2's introduction Bradley and Marder were a thing you absolute mong
He is comparing the BMP-2 to the Bradley, the BMP-1 was revolutionary and central to soviet doctrine, but the BMP-2 is inadequate relative to the NATO IFVs in its capacity as an APC.
The US was busy sabotaging its own projects with fucking retarded missiles and other fuckups like the MBT-70, and cancelling the T92 because of random extra requirements. Every tank since the M26 (which debatably every cold war US MBT was based on) was a stopgap up to the M1. The US was however able to use the British 105mm, benefit from British APDS and LRF research, British development of the commander Hunter-Killer system, and British two plane stabilisers, which it was implementing in incrimental upgrafes. Plus the British reclined driver seat and British chobham composite (it did attempt composite but the silicon panels were a failure) allowing it to develop the M1, and the German 120mm. Credit where its due, the US did actually first develop and field thermals for tanks, which is something the Soviets never managed. Ultimately yes, the US caught up in the 1980s, but it was only really somewhat behind from 1966-1980. The Soviets also werent light years ahead of NATO as a whole, and NATO was always going to operate together, at least in Germany. The 105 and superior systems on the upgraded M60s could've dealt with the majority of soviet tanks, which were T-55s+62s and the early T-72s. Germany has the marder in 1971, so the soviets are really ahead with the T-64s with their early composite resistant to even the 105 at most ranges, and APFSDS which could go through any NATO tank up until 1976, albeit Britain had the 120mm Chieftain, which could still frontally penetrate a T64. There's also America's historical neglect of ground forces in favour of air power, in which it was ahead, but thats semantics.
belongs at 11.3, the fact that gaijin thought putting this at 8.7 at one point was a good idea baffles me to this day.
the fact that its a squadron vehicle so any little old timmy can buy it straight up is annoying as fuck, well at least i imagine for ussr mains. the whole 8-10.0 range must suck as its nothing but premium 1-2 death max leavers lmao
>Whats the verdict on the BMP-2M?
Good concept poorly executed 30 years late.
has there ever been a single instance of a BMP successfully killing a tank with its ATGM?
they have no business being close enough to shoot one anyway
> The Syrians were not satisfied with their BMP-1s – they praised it for its speed and maneuverability but found the 2A28 "Grom" gun effective against enemy tanks only at ranges of less than 500 m. The 9M14M "Malyutka" ATGM was hard to aim from inside the vehicle while on the move.
> Israeli tank brigades suffered very high losses during the Syrian offensive. The Israelis noted that the "Malyutka" ATGMs, (including those launched from BMP-1s), were deadly against their tanks (the Sho't, the M48A3 Patton and the M60A1). The Israelis were able to destroy or capture 40–60 Egyptian BMP-1s and 50–60 Syrian BMP-1s out of a total of more than 200 destroyed or captured Arab APCs and IFVs.[18]
> Between 1992 and 1994 Azerbaijan lost 38 BMP-1s and Armenia lost from 51 to 53 IFVs in battles.[54] For that conflict, Nagorno-Karabakh Armenians made an interesting field modification. Six 9M14M "Malyutka" ATGMs were fitted on an elevatable mount from the 9P122 tank destroyer on the top of the turret at the rear.[29]
That’s just for the BMP-1. I would imagine more ATGM kills occurred in African wars and other Middle East conflicts. Given the changes in technology, I would imagine that BMPs with ATGMs be less important as time drags on, and with how bad the designs are but it’s still an armored vehicle with a big gun and the ability to mount/shoot missiles so Russia and Ukraine will use the for years to come.
Imagine the Grom with a modern FCS and modern munitions
It's just a medium caliber HE slinger. Not particularly notable
The BMP is like a Bradley if you made the ergonomics dogshit, downgraded the optics to either a garbage level or just mostly blurry depending on the variant and the protection was lackluster. There's honestly nothing that special about the BMP except for the fact that you have to be a midget or an amputee to fit into one with any degree of comfort.
itwas cost-effective 80% solution on paper, which ended to beoverpriced 30% solution irl due to russians being russians
>muh reddit NAFO
>check filename in archive
>it's a nogunz /misc/ poopskin
Every single time
https://archive.4plebs.org/pol/search/filename/58058203/
This meme is at least a decade old and it still remains true.
After all these years its even more funny and even more true
>Calle /k/ a nafo board
>Then calle it a /misc/ board
Which one it is
That one looks depressed
Wait, wasn't that one of the things that somehow didn't kill Nucking Futz?
Like he was thrown for metres when it launched a rocket at him but he survived somehow, and there's an awkward interview with him and Operator Starsky where it quickly becomes evident Futz's level of autism makes him so invulnerable, but socially impossible.
Glass cannon, always has been and it always will be. For all the shit the BMP-2 gets it has performed reasonably well in Ukie service
COMMENCE THE JIGGLIN
BOI-OI-OI-OI-OING
It will make everyone downrange duck, though.
We can go more wiggly.
Maybe. Depending on what they're doing it might not do anything at all
HATO still using MOA when russia is already at hours of arc
>pros
>you think you're suppressing a small recon squad, but actually suppressing a whole company hiding in the area that you don't know about.
>looks good on propaganda videos
>dakka
>cons
>instead of spending maybe 5 rounds on each target with a properly stabilized gun and optics, you have to spend +/- 30 rounds.
>you get droned or arty'd because you're a big metal bawks in the middle of an open elevated field making noise
>one barrel isn't enough dakka
The only reason this happens is because the firerate is unironically too high. Hence the BMP-3 onwards they use a slower firing gun. Specifically had a damn cage on the muzzle of the BMP3's 30mm to act as a sort of guiderail to make damn sure the gun didn't shake even though it was also slower firing.
The BMP-2's gun can be set for a slower or even semi auto fire rate as well, you're not supposed to mag dump on targets unless they're at very close range.
A time honored tradition for the BMP series.
>GRAU in turn had no lighter, automatic cannon available and did not oversee any institute or bureau that would be capable of designing one, as most were disbanded in the early 60’s. Automatic guns were only developed by the Soviet air force and the navy, but those fell under different government officials, not affiliated with GRAU. What made the matter even worse was the fact that certain GRAU generals „fell in love“ with the 2A28 caliber, promoting it as „the most powerful gun ever mounted on an IFV“. When actual officers in charge of these vehicles complained about the gun’s poor performance and accuracy, they were accused of poor maintenance and insufficient training with all the complaints being silently swept under the rug. But the rumors slowly made their way up the Soviet ranks and in the end, GBTU forced the issue by organizing official shooting trials at Kubinka proving grounds. A BMP-1 was to fire against an obsolete T-55 tank at 800 meters (the target was not moving). And the result of the trials? Of 50 shots, only 17 did hit the tank - others were carried off their trajectory by the wind. The shells that did hit made their impacts under different angles – some ricocheted, some did not, but in the end, not a single shell managed to penetrate the vehicle. After the trials, a driver just drove off with the undamaged tank – a fitting testament to the inefficiency of the Grom gun.
I never spend points on BTRs/BMPs. MTLBs for everyone. You can get a recon tank / Stryker for 25pts instead.
MTLBs get saved up the entire game and then go on the front line push of enemy town to take ATGMs if the opponent is too lazy to micro. If they do micro, they just stand there in front of town and pop away at ATGM teams while more MTLBs pull up with Spetz hit crew.
At 5 pts a piece, I like to pretend the MTLBs are remote controlled.
vaporware, is it not?
Given minuscule presence in the Russian military, it’s hard to say. Better just base your opinion from warthunder stats.
Like all BMP-2s
>armour too thin
>troop compartment too small
>no mine protection
Trying to cram a lot of upgrades into an outdated mass-warfare chasis, with low emphasis on surviveability, which is no longer sufficient for a modern combat environment with massive engagement distances and a high saturation of readily avaliable armour killing/damaging weapons. Still a decent weapon in many respects, scary for an infantry platoon to engage, at least at close range, but not a great APC at all. Surviveability is way too bad, probably safer to be in an armoured car.
Better than Toyota and Humvee
I'd much rather take a humvee, thankyouverymuch.
what are the russian's analogue of infantry AT weapon systems anyway?
like what are the russian Javelins and NLAWs and how effective are they/how well do they use them?
Russia likes to use a large variety of AT weapons ranging from ROG-7s with various types of warheads, disposable AT rockets or thermobaric launchers, and different types of ATGMs.
Russian ground doctrine has always been a ground focused one so often vehicles from the BTR, BMP, or BMD families will accompany infantry in addition to main battle tanks.
All that aside, I’d say the Kornet is Russia’s best analogue to the Javalin or NLAW.
>the Kornet is Russia’s best analogue to the Javalin or NLAW.
That's not saying much.
Yeah, other nations offer better alternatives. Take the Spike for instance or Javelin copycat from China.
>I’d say the Kornet is Russia’s best analogue to the Javalin or NLAW.
kornet is a heavy tripod mounted ATGM, its closer to the TOW missile
the javelin is a shoulder fired missile usually held at the platoon level, or even squad level
the closest russian equivelant is an RPG, which is not guided but is held at the squad level