Shall we go Russian?

Welcome to Philippines Defense Forces Forum. We hope you enjoy your visit.

You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.

Join our community!

If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Pages:
1
2
3
4
…
18

Shall we go Russian?
Tweet Topic Started: Aug 28 2004, 02:35 PM (13,393 Views)
Korzuv	Sep 14 2004, 09:22 PM Post #21
Trainee Posts: 48 Group: Trainees Member #130 Joined: September 14, 2004	Prices of other Russian-made armoured vehicles: in US Dollars T-55 98,139 T-62 82,571 T-64 - 230,880 T-64A - 249,033 T-64B1 -421,934 T-72A - 337,247 T-72B - 421,200 T-80UD 1,143,480 affordable :thumb:



adroth	Sep 15 2004, 06:03 AM Post #22
Member Posts: 1,127 Group: Regulars Member #13 Joined: July 12, 2004	Iron Dragon Sep 14 2004, 05:37 PM I really would like our AFP to consider the BMP-3, at 800K dollars fully loaded, its affordable compared to the European and American new gen IFVs. The AFP, particularly the Marines, looked at the BMP-3 a while back. In the end they decided that it did not suit their doctrines, and they proposed the purchase of AAV7P instead. Another thing we have to consider when deciding weapons purchases is the impact on logistics: - Required training (how good are the Russians at after-sales support) - New types of ammunition - Spares All three have hidden costs. Given the close relationship between China and Russia, if a conflict ever broke out between us and the PRC, do you think we can count on the Russians to continue to supply us with the spares and ammunition required to keep our Russian equipment functional?
	Avatar c/o: http://www.proudlypinoy.org/ Defense of the Republic of the Philippines (DefensePH)


Killhorn	Sep 15 2004, 08:51 AM Post #23
Trainee Posts: 48 Group: Regulars Member #90 Joined: August 21, 2004	The PMC tested the non-Marine enhanced variant of the BMP-3 which is more suited to PA.
	Visit: Philippine Scouts Heritage Society Captain John Wheeler leading the Machine Gun Troop of the 26th Cavalry Regiment(P.S)(Horse) just prior to the Japanese invasion.


Stalker	Sep 15 2004, 01:10 PM Post #24
Unregistered	Killhorn is referring to the BMP-3F Quote: The BMP-3F is a BMP-3 modified for use by Naval Infantry and other amphibious or Marine-type troops. The BMP-3F is slightly lighter than the standard BMP-3, but the primary modifications for Naval Infantry use are a rearrangement of the components and interior to distribute the weight of the vehicle better in the water, stronger bilge pumps, a larger trim vane, and more powerful waterjets to make it faster in the water. Door, hatch, and turret seals are also improved to prevent leaking. The BMP-3F is more stable in the water, particularly in high surf and swells, and much more difficult to sink as long as holes are not blasted into it or a hatch is not left open. The sensors are also behind waterproof windows or lenses. Fire from the water is possible with all weapons, but at one higher level of difficulty. The BMP-3F also has tow hooks on the upper rear hull to allow it to tow small boats or rafts. Russian Tracked Vehicles Personally, I prefer the BMP-3F over the AAV7P. It costs much much less and is better armed and protected. Its firepower right off the beach!
Unregistered


shadowsniper	Sep 15 2004, 08:07 PM Post #25
Member Posts: 226 Group: Regulars Member #120 Joined: September 8, 2004	Stalker Sep 15 2004, 01:10 PM Personally, I prefer the BMP-3F over the AAV7P. It costs much much less and is better armed and protected. Its firepower right off the beach! but still it depends on the AFP to decide..
	"The important things are always simple and the simple are always hard." LET'S GO ARMY!!!


hoyhoyhoy	Sep 16 2004, 12:34 PM Post #26
Unregistered	AAV pa rin yan kasi millions ang SOP
Unregistered


Switik	Sep 16 2004, 05:38 PM Post #27
Member Posts: 799 Group: Regulars Member #5 Joined: July 9, 2004	Quote: The AFP, particularly the Marines, looked at the BMP-3 a while back. In the end they decided that it did not suit their doctrines, and they proposed the purchase of AAV7P instead. The AAV is excellent at transporting the grunts to shore but has limited armor and armaments. The BMP, while cramped for the troops inside, can swim from assault ship to shore then blast its way through beach defenses with ease compared to the lightly armed AAV.



adroth	Sep 17 2004, 07:04 AM Post #28
Member Posts: 1,127 Group: Regulars Member #13 Joined: July 12, 2004	Switik Sep 16 2004, 05:38 PM Quote: The AFP, particularly the Marines, looked at the BMP-3 a while back. In the end they decided that it did not suit their doctrines, and they proposed the purchase of AAV7P instead. The AAV is excellent at transporting the grunts to shore but has limited armor and armaments. The BMP, while cramped for the troops inside, can swim from assault ship to shore then blast its way through beach defenses with ease compared to the lightly armed AAV. Apparently its not the PMC's game plan to have their amphibous transport blast itself away from shore. Remember, the BMP is not all that well protected either. Who knows, they could be relying on another vehicle acquisition to provide the firepower component of their beach assault units. I remember in the old Opus forum, MBLT was talking about how they already had a design for a muzzle brake that would minimize the recoil of the 152mm gun on the M-551 Sheridan. (To see is to believe of course). So instead of a "jack of all trades, master of none" solution they may be going for a specialized approach. If an piece of gear doesn't fit in with the overall strategy, then its a waste of resources.
	Avatar c/o: http://www.proudlypinoy.org/ Defense of the Republic of the Philippines (DefensePH)


Tantalus	Sep 17 2004, 03:45 PM Post #29
Member Posts: 175 Group: Regulars Member #123 Joined: September 10, 2004	Quote: Apparently its not the PMC's game plan to have their amphibous transport blast itself away from shore. Remember, the BMP is not all that well protected either. Who knows, they could be relying on another vehicle acquisition to provide the firepower component of their beach assault units. Is this cost-effective? And the assault ship can only carry as much vehicles.



hurricane	Sep 18 2004, 11:52 AM Post #30
Unregistered	agree with tantalus... Quote: If an piece of gear doesn't fit in with the overall strategy, then its a waste of resources. if a vehicle can be >BOTH< and IFV and an FSV, is it waste of resources? i think not... the BMP-3F can protect itself better against MBTs and even helos and can even swim with ERA added, its extra firepower can provide support to infantry in real time..
Unregistered


1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)


Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · General Military and Law Enforcement · Next Topic »

Pages:
1
2
3
4
…
18