Bmp 3 Scary or not ?

Discussion in 'Military History and Militaria' started by woody, Jan 11, 2006.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. Not sure where to put this so put it in here (mods move as appropriate ) doing annual vechical recogntion .Learning about bmp 3 . It seems to me to be a scary bit of kit .Anyone know if real life has proved this vechicle or is it like other soviet kit scary to look at but reality some what lacking ? Just glad 3rd shock never had it :lol:
  2. I think it has a few planners concerned as it has a bit of potential, but I gather its in limited supply.
  3. Supposed to be as useless as the 1 and 2 turned out to be. Anything Russian that is scared of MILAN is sh1te Nowdays considering the kit we now have!
  4. You have to be a bit of a midget with hardly any battle clobber to fit in the back though. Imagine several hours couped up in that !!! I did hear a rumour that a walt firm ( got hold of an amphibious version of BMP1 off the Checz & tryed it out in a local pond where it swiftly sank. I think its just all mouth & no trousers. It looks the part but thats just about it.

    Regards LT.
  5. The main armourment could mess you up a little bit though... I wouldn't discard it right away. And doesn't one model come with some sort of anti-tank add on as well? Could ruin your day, but then again you probably wouldn't ever be in a position where it could engage you any way...

    T C
  6. I know the BMP1 was capable of fireing the SAGGER missile. Of course that & its 73mm gun could ruin your day if they get the chance to. Where they that effective during the early days in Iraq? TC your right I,m so far down the LTR list now the chinks would have to be landing at Dover for the army to get me back in green. But I did spend a few years in a place where there were thousands of the bloody things a few miles away just waiting for the word go. So we did do our homework on them & even got to have a look round one & a few other of its stable mates.

    Regards LT.
  7. mysteron

    mysteron LE Book Reviewer

    All of the stats involved in BMP3 do make it a very capable piece of kit.

    I am led to believe that the workmanship and quality of material in production stalled its export sales and hence, one would surmise, it is not as good as it claims to be.

    Now with high quality material and production...........that is an altogether different question.
  8. The only people who "big up" Russian kit, are western threat "experts" and western arms dealers...

    Every singular piece of russian kit (excepting the AK series) has been Jerry built with poor materials, bad workmanship, limited lifespan, and serious design flaws (was it the T72 autoloader that had a nasty habit of feeding one of the crew into the gun occasionaly)

    But.. all through the cold war we were told that they were bigger, harder,faster,and better equipped than us to justify defence spending and levels of forces kept in Germany....while western arms manufacturers rubbed their collective hands in glee at the latest batch of gloomy "threat estimates" coming from the hand wringers who wrote them...

    i'd be surprised if they'd make it off the square before throwing a track, breaking down, catching fire and incinerating all the crew.
  9. Poor workmanship is true, however the Ukrainians have taken the basic Soviet designs and built them to better standards with more modern fire control etc. This is also true for Czech and polish kit which is being swapped out for western kit when they can afford it, so be careful, it may be a BMP but it could be ex NATO with modern engines and fire control :wink:
  10. I'm reliably led to believe that the myth about the loaders' arms was just that: a deliberate myth put about by the Soviets. Tests on available T72 since the fall of the wall, and unhelpfully since the design of CR2, show that it's actually pretty capable and gets rid of the need for an extra crewman. I can't back this up at the moment, but I'll look.

    ...and T34 seemed to do the job...
  11. The question is, is it an IFV that's pretending to be a tank and therefore likely to get used against CR2 and murdered, or is it an IFV with a stupidly huge amount of firepower that's going to bully the infantry?
  12. I doubt they are going to get chance to bully anyone. Them kind of vehicles are given a shoeing by our air campaign long before we hit the ground. Thank god for the "Lightning War"