So ukies designed their own low cost IFV, and is about to enter prototype production. A mid-engine design. The thing literally looks like BTR-4E on treads. It could work well sure, but I seriously question the choice of having side doors for the vehicle crew. Doesn't that significantly compromise it's armor protection? I get it, the mid-engine means the crew will need to have dedicated entrances. But it makes way more sense to just have top hatches that are not in direct line of fire.
>>65496325>Pegassus
>>65496325Looking over some other pics of it and how much it weighs.....Given that they wanted a BMP replacement, don't care about amphibious capacity, probably wanted a base design with alot of space and have access to a modern drive train and engines...For some reason it almost feels like they started with a BTR-50 which isn't necessarily as dumb as it sounds.
>>65496339>SNOOPEGAS USUAL I SEEMy boy, this Pegas is what all true warriors strive for. It is written, only Pegas can defeat Monke.
>>65496325the vast majority of vehicle kills in this war are by drones with PG-7 warheads, that's gonna go through the hatch just as well as it would monolithic armor. we're talking IFV armor here, it's stanag level 4, not tank armor, as long as it's not BMD-tier and can stand up to small arms up to 14.5 from the side it's good enough (for a low cost IFV) and well within the realm of hatch-armor. the crew being able to bail out quickly from whatever side isn't facing the enemy is a useful feature, with only roof hatches the crew are very vulnerable when bailing out and the crew passageway to the rear of the vehicle is fairly narrow on the ukrainian vehicles and not conducive to being able to bail out quickly, so having an additional means to bail out does help.if this were a better armored vehicle, obviously that cost-benefit analysis changes. that being said I think honestly, crew bail-out is an under-appreciated part of IFV design, a lot of western IFVs are still running manned turrets that interfere with the crew's ability to bail out from alternative exits, and the heavier armor makes the side-doors unattractive. Unsurprisingly, newer IFVs like Puma (picrel) with unmanned low-penetration turrets are the best in this respect, though there's certainly compromises.
Oh shit, my 'BTR-50' as base design thought might actually be true; Morozow makes this and they also offer a shitload of BTR-50 upgrades that turn it into something resembling a modern vehicle. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BTR-50
>>65496339>pegasusdoes it come with Mario and Duck Hunt?
>>65496421>only roof hatchesDude, i seriously think they started with a BTR-50, ditched the amphibious capacity and added a bunch of armor. Every feature on this thing is something they offer for BTR-50 upgrades. The hatches are even in the same place.
>>65496432yeah, except the part that they're not, the engine position is different, the interior layout is different, the hull shape is different, the suspension is different (AFAIK?) (both torsion bar but trailing arm vs leading arm on the BTR-50), has return rollers and follows from the pre-war BMP-U lineage
>>65496454 (me)correction, I think BTR-50 might also be trailing arm suspension, but return rollers vs no return rollers I think makes it pretty clear the setup is derived from BMPs rather than BTR-50
>>65496429Only Mariopol
>>65496421>it's stanag level 4Is it though?>and can stand up to small arms up to 14.5 from the sideCan it though?
>>65496454>Hull shapeNot so much, especially on the upgraded BTR-50s this exact same company makes. Look for a BTR-50 variant that has this basic hull shape and you will find half a dozen. Everything else you mentioned are all things you would alter when changing the BTR-50 design from a light (but large) APC into a IFV. The BTR-50s biggest design issue was the machinery for the waterjets taking up space and making the interior awkward despite it's huge (20) troop capacity. Since this doesn't have amphibious capacity they would free up alot of design room for them to rearrange. Add more space in the nose and raise the rear deck and it starts looking like pic related from Serbia.Of course it would be VERY heavily altered from the BTR-50 design but given that these guys are so heavily invested in BTR-50 upgrades (literally everything this has is offered by them as a BTR-50 upgrade) it seems logical they would look at a base design that they already knew well and wasn't a BMP. I just find it very hard to believe that given how much this design team has worked with BTR-50s that it didn't influence them. That isn't something to be ashamed of, despite being really old and having a few design compromisesthe BTR-50 wasn't and isn't a bad design. >>6549649314.5mm suffers from no one really bothering to make all sorts of fancy new rounds for it like .50 BMG, everyone seems to be OK with chugging out the same old AP-I which to be fair works just fine for a general purpose round.
which member of kvartal 95 is getting 10% of all funds set aside for this IFV?
>>65496407PEGAS-SAGEP
>>65496325Low cost compared to what? A Bradley?
>BTR-50On the subject of shitty Soviet antiques, when was an MTLB last seen in the wild? Or are they officially extinct?
>>65497031They are extinct from storage depos and mostly from the front as well, but one does show up every so often.
>>65497031>>65497037>You are now aware that there are more BTR-50s in active service world wide than there are MTLBs.
>>65496407
>>65496325It's most likely going to be hit from the roof, so I can see the logic in skimping on the sides and turning the glacis into a slope skyward.
this looks like it is designed to steal money not to win a war
>>65496525>>65496421I But is 14.5 even a realistic threat? I know you could get shot by someone with a kord or dushka if you were unlucky, or someone could take potshots at you with AP .338, but engaging anything heavier than that seems rather unlikely to me. If you get got by an auto cannon it's game over anyway. The most relevant protection is against mines, 150mm, mortar and drones
>>65497031I wouldn't be surprised if the Russian mtlb was mostly extinct. It's rather ironic their western neighbor probably has the most of them in service as of right now
>>65497091but enough about the russian mic
I mean, it's good that we are doing this, but the design of this chassis is 1970's tier. Where is modularity? Where is spaced armor? Where are are production-default ERA mounts? And don't get me started on those neat side hatches.Ffs, just take Kevlar-E and make the fighting compartment 10-20cm higher, it's your own design anyway.Regardless, of all the domestic designs, it was really BMP-V "Babylon" that was really best suited for this war. Unfortunate that AREI got fucked over by petty politics.
>>65497257https://en.defence-ua.com/news/ukrainian_company_unveils_concept_design_for_armored_fighting_vehicle_named_babylon-1868.htmlhttps://militarnyi.com/uk/news/z-yavylys-vizualizatsiya-proyektu-ukrayinskoyi-vazhkoyi-bmp-vavilon/https://epravda.com.ua/publications/2024/01/22/708990/
>>65497071Designed to ford through CRUD AND SLUDGE
>>65496525sovl>>65497257anti-sovl
>>65497263"Sovl" is when picrel?
>>65497261>Treating an IFV like a boatYou guys aren't going to get away with this!
>>65496325Ukraine didn't need ifv, they dont have enough fuel for them. They also not in any position to attack.What they need is more manpower to reinforce their defence line.
>>65497322Nigga...
>>65497337So... they throw whatever left of their armed force to gain few square miles. Is their new position even defendable? What did they hope to accomplish by doing that?
>>65497344You should lurk more and post less
>>65497344>get proved wrong>proceed to sour grapesGod, Russians are so fucking tedious to talk to.
>>65497344>Is their new position even defendable?They threw your cumrags back across a body of water, of course it is.
>>65496325More interested in their Berserk heavy IFV. They have been planning this for about a decade. Basically a halfway between the Puma and Namer. Tank based heavy IFV. Extremely heavy hull with MBT protection for a full squad with long range stand off, ERA and APS. It was to use the driveline of the T84 Oplot making 1400hp~1500hp with a transmission allowing same speeds forward and backwards. They still plan to eventually put it into production but it's now looking like it will use German stuff via Rheinmetall. Basically a Puma but bigger and perfected.
>we didn't need it anyway>>65497344>>65497360Ziggers:Arrogant as Re'LuDumb as TarthVile as Cyth
>>65496325You can uparmor a side door infinitely better than a top hatch. A uparmored hatch can be motorized but shit fails and gravity is working against it. You can also putnl ERA after standoff armor on a side door
>>65497398>tfw no R34 of Oolan
>>65496325>side doors for the vehicle crew.That's probably just a maintenance access door for an accessory system, not a crew egress. It's not in a good position for front evacuation. Probably a hatch for second priority fluids and electronics checks. Denounce Putin
>>65497322>they dont have enough fuelUkraine has more than enough fuel, pidorovich.>They also not in any position to attack.Is that why your zigger comrades keep losing ground, pidorovich?
>>65497344>whatever leftWhy yes. Surely THIS TIME it's "whatever is left" and Ukraine will suffer total military collapse within two weeks. You subhuman retards were saying the same thing all the way back in 2022 right before the great Izyum rout.
>>65497387Russia also planned a 'super heavy' IFV with the T-15. But that kinda fell apart when their Armata universal hull thing collapsed.
>>65497455The difference is that Ukraine has industrial support from Germany, USA, France, South Korea, Japan, Italy etc while Russia stutters with grey market Iranian and North Korean imports because China favors high profit civil commercial profits and FDI. If Russia is lucky they can become Chinas Mexico in a few years and build second rate products with their past gen components.
>>65497263>anti-sovlIt's a very IFV made based on demilled T-64 chassis
>>65497437kekwell, she's only so outwardly beautiful thanks to her telepathy.
>>65497458>Russia is lucky they can become Chinas Mexico in a few years and build second rate products with their past gen components.Imagine the quality you’d get from russian production culture combined with the engineering level of any-gen chinese designs, lmao.
>>65496432the track is tenssioned so your theory goes out the window
>>65497261I'm demoting you to serbian shill 3rd class. Now go and mop up the russian cum!
>>65497269How can you look at that image and not see it as pure /k/ino. Aesthics > Survivability
>>65497455>Armata universal hullTurns out it's a bad idea to design a vehicle around a shit engine that doesn't work, and an autoloader that can't fit the longer penetrators or reload the magazine from inside.
>>65497455The universal hull design could work if you just gonna have an MBT, AA, Recovery, Bridging, etc. variants. i.e. what everybody else's already doing.It stops making sense then moment when you also need it to ferry troops. The engine simply can't remain in the same place as in an MBT.
>>65497102Norktard is a bit off the mark. China sells and exports modern tungsten APDS, API, APDS/HEI, and other 14.5mm which is all super fuckin' meaty.
>>65497337The cauldron is boiling!
>>65497269Every great story has an ending. A flower isn't beautiful because it lasts.
>>65496325It really just needs anti drone guns, armor is obsolete and slows you down. If artillery shrapnel can't penetrate it then it's more than gud enuff
>>65497102STANAG 4569 Level 4 goes beyond just 14.5, 14.5 is just the threat that people usually talk about. The standard requires resistance to 155 mm fragments at 25 m and a 10 kg mine blast.
>>65497926It was a retarded project even without considering the engine fuckup
>>65498735People are generally more familiar with ballistic "bullet" threats because of the frequency of body armor convos.There are several examples of plates rated for 12.7x108mm and .50 BMG threats. Some have been around since the 1990s. 14.5mm rated plates? Right out except for like one 20 year old Ceradyne meant for Apache pilots / gunners. Fuckheug full torso shit that needed standoff.Thus, people focus more on 14.5mm.
>>65497257>Where is modularity?No. Full stop no. I wish death upon those that utter the word "modularity". That's how projects die, by losing focus. It's a cheap IFV and that's all it needs to be.
>>65499621>That's how projects dieThe future is now ol' fag.Modular vehicle that can be fitted according the mission they are going to take is the future.
>>65496407TOMORROW I’LLTOMORROW I’LL INVENT THE PEGAS
>>65497337>Is their new position even defendable?It clearly wasn’t for Russia, kek.
>>65497686Israel did the same thing with all the old commie shit they captured , it turns out old Soviet armor does really well with Cummins drives and engines. They reworked them.
>>65502562Unsurprising. Engines and transmissions are usually the worst parts of Soviet designs.
>>65500358must be more than 15 years since I last listened to it and it still came right back to me reading that
looks awfully long for an ifv
>>65496325Why mid engine? So you can have dismounts in the back without a frontal non-catastrophic pen disabling the engine? You would probably still be mobility kill if it breeches the crew compartment and now your expensive troops are dead instead of an engine plus you cannot mount pic related.
>>65505669Or such. Just on a mortar kick.
>>65505670
>>65505672
>>65505673
>>65505676
>>65505680
>>65505669it adds unnecessary length to the vehicle. The engine should just be next to the driver like literally everybody else's doing it. it's a proven layout for a reason.
>>65505670This is RAK on Rosomak APC, Finnish Patria variant. Patria was considered for Cops LAV25 replacement about a dozen years ago. Poles have mounted it to Marder as well.
>>65497926>>65498766What possessed Russia to use an outdated WWII engine as the basis for the Armata when they had a dozen commercial engines that would had outpaced it both in horsepower and efficiency to chose from?
>>65505669>>65505696I figure it's more about giving the commander better visibility, at least in the BTR-4. No idea why they kept it for this IFV though
>>65505702As with all things, it's legacy Soviet tech. At the time, the V-series was proven tech, and it worked well enough. Slapping two together was not altogether a bad idea for increasing horsepower, certainly easier than developing something from scratch. They were using it in (and still are) a ton of AFVs, so it made sense to keep pushing existing tech. The Soviets weren't interested since developed gas turbines for the T-80s, but obviously those lost favor after the end of the Soviet Union and Russia went broke, focusing on the T-72s. The V-series of engines became the favored option once again and thus they revived the X-engine for Armata. I assume for one, it's because modifying a commercial engine for tank use would've required significant work and testing, and also the Chelyabinsk plant was probably pretty influential.
>>65505696I may be ignorant. Also>mid engineallows for a decent variety of placement.
>>65505733 (me)I should mention,>At the timerefers to the late 1970s, first prototype produced in May of 1977 per this german https://www.kotsch88.de/al_geschichte_T54_teil_2.htm
>>6549710214.5 is super prolific in Ukraine. It also makes certain that 12.7 is stopped.
>>65505755And the weight penalty is acceptable.
>>65497102>>65498735>>65498788Apparently there is also a Lvl 6 for 30mm at 500m.
>>65505702The hull was designed around the 6-TD( the same as on the Oplot), but then Crimea happened. UVZ got left with no other option but this X-shapeb monstrocity from Chelyabinsk., since nothing else would fit.
>>65505756So 14.5 proof pl8s are possible.
>>65496407haPINESS is always so much more enjoyable, when it's BASED
>>65496325I wonder if they increased the top-deck armour? Not that Russia had much in the way off top down missiles but that's sort of where the drones like to attack from>>65497337>the benis is now an inny
>>65497458>Chinas MexicoOr wait for it... India's Mexico!
>>65505702>What possessed Russia to use an outdated WWII engine as the basis for the Armata Because it is what they use for all their tanks.
>>65505755Sure, but when are you going to face 14.5 with an ifv? I get it that it could be useful for rating's sake, but at least you could realistically expect to get shot by a .50. What are the more realistic threats? Like I said before: mines, arty, drones, a mobik with a dshk and if you're very unlucky an auto cannon or round from a tank. The two latter ones will kill you anyway
>>65497102The level of armor which stops HMGs is the same level needed to stop a good-enough percent of artillery fragments. If you go civilian armor or VDV tin can level you will be shredded by 155s.
>>65506112>Sure, but when are you going to face 14.5 with an ifv?Always, back when these ratings were made.The 14.5mm KPVT is the primary weapon on Soviet APCs and recon vehicles like the BRDM 2.
