BMP-3 - The IFV with the firepower of a light tank

[Cadianguardian 61]

IRC HEAT penetration can be very inconsistent for example :T-64B Kobra ATGM can penetrate up to ~700mm but devs chose lowest reliable penetration for Soviet HEAT for some reason. For Example: 115mm HEATFS can penetrate 480 or 555mm in same conditions.

Edited April 13, 2018 by Cadianguardian

[WulfPack 1,693]

10 hours ago, Cadianguardian said:

IRC HEAT penetration can be very inconsistent for example :T-64B Kobra ATGM can penetrate up to ~700mm but devs chose lowest reliable penetration for Soviet HEAT for some reason. For Example: 115mm HEATFS can penetrate 480 or 555mm in same conditions.

This seems to be case as most put them both between 550 - 600.

[swpixy 1,220]

12 hours ago, Cadianguardian said:

IRC HEAT penetration can be very inconsistent for example :T-64B Kobra ATGM can penetrate up to ~700mm but devs chose lowest reliable penetration for Soviet HEAT for some reason. For Example: 115mm HEATFS can penetrate 480 or 555mm in same conditions.

It may also be a case of actual vs effective penetration (as in,"what you can penetrate" vs "what you can penetrate and while still doing sufficient post-penetration damage".

 

 

[Flavettes 1,101]

Well either way BMP-2 will have to come before the BMP-3. We'll see how it performs, and then judge whether BMP-3 is a good idea or not.

[Cadianguardian 61]

15 hours ago, swpixy said:

It may also be a case of actual vs effective penetration (as in,"what you can penetrate" vs "what you can penetrate and while still doing sufficient post-penetration damage".

 

 

This wouldn't be problem if M456A1 used lowest reliable penetration but it is uses it's average reliable penetration .While BK-3 uses lowest reliable penetration.I propose that all HEAT based munition uses maximum realible penetration.So Kobra will 700mm and Arkan 600mm pen.

[Nope 10,634]

2 hours ago, Flavettes said:

Well either way BMP-2 will have to come before the BMP-3. We'll see how it performs, and then judge whether BMP-3 is a good idea or not.

 

Remember that this would be the base BMP-2 with a Konkurs at best, not the BMP-2M.

[kev2go 5,112]

13 hours ago, Flavettes said:

Well either way BMP-2 will have to come before the BMP-3. We'll see how it performs, and then judge whether BMP-3 is a good idea or not.

 

Bmp 2 will really just be BMP1P ( which is what  it turns into  when spaded) .  with an Autocannon. IMHO it will feel like  more of a Sidegrade than a true upgrade

Edited April 14, 2018 by kev2go

[Flavettes 1,101]

10 minutes ago, kev2go said:

 

Bmp 2 will really just be BMP1P ( which is what  it turns into  when spaded) .  with an Autocannon. IMHO it will feel like  more of a Sidegrade than a true upgrade

 

BMP-3 isn't that different since its 100mm only fires HE which is worthless. Its only useful cannon is still the 30mm, so it's not much better than the BMP-2.

 

BMP-2 is definitely an improvement over the BMP-1P. The horrendous reload on the 73mm of the BMP-1P makes it terrible against a tank and especially bad against tanks that can eat the first shot. If your first shot doesn't make it through or you don't disable his weapon, you're screwed. 30mm APDS of the BMP-2 at 550-800 RPM will make it much more dangerous when flanking tanks especially since lots of NATO tanks don't have good side armor. Chieftains, Challenger, Abrams, Leopards, etc.

Edited April 14, 2018 by Flavettes

[CoMurey2 131]

God damn it, I wish that the 100mm had a heatfs-t round which will make it more useful in battle.... Look at BMP-2's 73mm the heatfs on it is super useful.

[Flavettes 1,101]

1 minute ago, CoMurey2 said:

God damn it, I wish that the 100mm had a heatfs-t round which will make it more useful in battle.... Look at BMP-2's 73mm the heatfs on it is super useful.

 

Or maybe make HE useful again. It could be useful for hullbreaking other light tanks or SPAAs, but there aren't many of those on opposing teams. IRL, 76mm HE could penetrate 20-30mm of armor according to actual testing and 85mm HE could penetrate 45mm at 30 degrees at 500 meters and 50mm at 30 degrees at 300 meters or closer. 100mm HE penetrates only 19mm at the moment which is an utter joke. 100mm HE should penetrate a bit more than that even if it is fired from a low velocity cannon like the BMP-3's 100mm cannon, so it could be useful at punching thru the side of a Leopard or the rear armor of some tanks.

[RefrigerRaider 563]

you should know that the 100mm can also fire atgm, superior mobility and the position of the atgm launcher makes close range shots more reliable, the hp/ton ratio of the bmp3 is also superior to the abrams, but not the bmp2

Edited April 15, 2018 by RefrigerRaider

[Ronin_GE 694]

1 hour ago, Flavettes said:

 

Or maybe make HE useful again. It could be useful for hullbreaking other light tanks or SPAAs, but there aren't many of those on opposing teams. IRL, 76mm HE could penetrate 20-30mm of armor according to actual testing and 85mm HE could penetrate 45mm at 30 degrees at 500 meters and 50mm at 30 degrees at 300 meters or closer. 100mm HE penetrates only 19mm at the moment which is an utter joke. 100mm HE should penetrate a bit more than that even if it is fired from a low velocity cannon like the BMP-3's 100mm cannon, so it could be useful at punching thru the side of a Leopard or the rear armor of some tanks.

Just keep in mind that the 100mm gun is using comparatively low preasure IOT keep it light and the recoil limited. So engaging a mover whit shots from it might be a challenge.

But thats what the ATGM i for...

 

[CoMurey2 131]

1 hour ago, Flavettes said:

 

Or maybe make HE useful again. It could be useful for hullbreaking other light tanks or SPAAs, but there aren't many of those on opposing teams. IRL, 76mm HE could penetrate 20-30mm of armor according to actual testing and 85mm HE could penetrate 45mm at 30 degrees at 500 meters and 50mm at 30 degrees at 300 meters or closer. 100mm HE penetrates only 19mm at the moment which is an utter joke. 100mm HE should penetrate a bit more than that even if it is fired from a low velocity cannon like the BMP-3's 100mm cannon, so it could be useful at punching thru the side of a Leopard or the rear armor of some tanks.

 

Indeed... what a joke, even BMP-1 low pressure gun can fire heatfs. So, why not BMP-3.

 

55 minutes ago, RefrigerRaider said:

you should know that the 100mm can also fire atgm, superior mobility and the position of the atgm launcher makes close range shots more reliable, the hp/ton ratio of the bmp3 is also superior to the abrams, but not the bmp2

 

I know, but the limited numbers of them make it unreliable in long fights. Look at the BMP-1 it does have 2 lesser ATGMs and when you run out of them you're back to heatfs...

 

12 minutes ago, Ronin_GE said:

Just keep in mind that the 100mm gun is using comparatively low preasure IOT keep it light and the recoil limited. So engaging a mover whit shots from it might be a challenge.

But thats what the ATGM i for...

 

 

BMP-1 is a low pressure as well and that doesn't effect the mobility of it...

[WulfPack 1,693]

27 minutes ago, CoMurey2 said:

 

Indeed... what a joke, even BMP-1 low pressure gun can fire heatfs. So, why not BMP-3.

Well it wasn't meant to engage armor. 

[Flavettes 1,101]

2 hours ago, Ronin_GE said:

Just keep in mind that the 100mm gun is using comparatively low preasure IOT keep it light and the recoil limited. So engaging a mover whit shots from it might be a challenge.

But thats what the ATGM i for...

 

 

That's why I said that the BMP-3 doesn't really have much of an advantage over the BMP-2, especially since the BMP-2 cannon also fires faster. 

[Ronin_GE 694]

1 hour ago, Flavettes said:

 

That's why I said that the BMP-3 doesn't really have much of an advantage over the BMP-2, especially since the BMP-2 cannon also fires faster. 

The only way to make the canon of the BMP-2 fire faster then the BMP-3's RoF, is using the emergency fire button directly at the gun...with a huge loss in accuracy and stab-switched of as a downside.

3 hours ago, CoMurey2 said:

BMP-1 is a low pressure as well and that doesn't effect the mobility of it...

The BMP1's gun is uttrer c**p, a rocket assisted RPG-warhead tumbling in the wind. It may have punch when you hit something, but hitting something is not very likely

[kev2go 5,112]

2 hours ago, Flavettes said:

 

That's why I said that the BMP-3 doesn't really have much of an advantage over the BMP-2, especially since the BMP-2 cannon also fires faster. 

 

faster firing cannon isn't much better if you cant frontally penetrate top tier tanks, and if Flanks are still crapshoot. Itl only be better at destroying litghly armored targets like SPAA

 

Even on flanks Many  tanks  have thick enough side armor. And these arent even top tier tank im about to mention. 

 

at 0 meter's no angle the 2a42 30mm gun  AP ammo only penetrates 48mm of armor at 0 meters ( courtesy of tankograd).  Centurion Mk10,  M47 M48,  M60, & M60A1's weakest Point on its side turret armor are above 48mm ( even without taking into consideration sloping which raises it higher)

 

 

There are points in side Chasis armor In-between tracks that are also greater than 48mm. It wont be Killing so easily with its rapid cannon, It will still be something of a Crapshoot against many tanks. Only lighter armored tanks like the Leopard 1 will be able to be killed reliably enough from side flanks.

 

AT the end of the day.   Hate to break it to you but like  the Bmp1 Bmp2's main AT weapon will be its AGTM. Once it runs out of those its going to be an  easy kill for any armored vehicle that doesn't have paper armor, especially given BMP's armor itself is barely adequate against heavy MGs like the 50 calibre.

 

 

 

 

Edited April 15, 2018 by kev2go

[kev2go 5,112]

3 hours ago, WulfPack said:

Well it wasn't meant to engage armor. 

 

yup at the end of the day Placing BMPs in war thunder puts them in a position where they are forced to go up agianst nothing but armor, Whre IRL theier job as "IFV" was to taxi troops to places and support their advance with supressive fire, and smash lighter defenses & as a side job act as Armored recon ( although there were dedicated versions for this latter job). IN general Anti Armor capabilities ( largely revolving around AGTM) are mostly for Self Defense purposes than to take the role of Dedicated tank killers  from the MBT.

 

Which kinda makes me wish Gajin wasnt worried about AGe rating of war thunder. IFV's with AI infantry would be so much immersive to play with.

Edited April 15, 2018 by kev2go

[Flavettes 1,101]

1 hour ago, kev2go said:

 

faster firing cannon isn't much better if you cant frontally penetrate top tier tanks, and if Flanks are still crapshoot. Itl only be better at destroying litghly armored targets like SPAA

 

Even on flanks Many  tanks  have thick enough side armor. And these arent even top tier tank im about to mention. 

 

at 0 meter's no angle the 2a42 30mm gun  AP ammo only penetrates 48mm of armor at 0 meters ( courtesy of tankograd).  Centurion Mk10,  M47 M48,  M60, & M60A1's weakest Point on its side turret armor are above 48mm ( even without taking into consideration sloping which raises it higher)

 

 

There are points in side Chasis armor In-between tracks that are also greater than 48mm. It wont be Killing so easily with its rapid cannon, It will still be something of a Crapshoot against many tanks. Only lighter armored tanks like the Leopard 1 will be able to be killed reliably enough from side flanks.

 

AT the end of the day.   Hate to break it to you but like  the Bmp1 Bmp2's main AT weapon will be its AGTM. Once it runs out of those its going to be an  easy kill for any armored vehicle that doesn't have paper armor, especially given BMP's armor itself is barely adequate against heavy MGs like the 50 calibre.

 

Faster ROF helps against CAS and using APDS solves the problem of crude AP rounds to a large extent. 

1 hour ago, Ronin_GE said:

The only way to make the canon of the BMP-2 fire faster then the BMP-3's RoF, is using the emergency fire button directly at the gun...with a huge loss in accuracy and stab-switched of as a downside.

 

I don't know what you're talking about. BMP-3's autocannon fires at 350-400 RPM whereas BMP-2's autocannon fires at 550-800 RPM.

[Ronin_GE 694]

1 hour ago, Flavettes said:

I don't know what you're talking about. BMP-3's autocannon fires at 350-400 RPM whereas BMP-2's autocannon fires at 550-800 RPM.

BMP-2's 2A42 also runs on a 300~400 ish RoF, the only way to get into the 550+ Ballpark is when you do  not use the the standart trigger, but the emergency trigger...which will give a reduced accuracy and is not recomened to use with STAB-on. Also only the TC and not the gunner has access to that trigger.

At least that what the fins told me.

Edited April 15, 2018 by Ronin_GE

[Nope 10,634]

3 hours ago, Ronin_GE said:

The BMP1's gun is uttrer c**p, a rocket assisted RPG-warhead tumbling in the wind. It may have punch when you hit something, but hitting something is not very likely

 

just like me at carnival games

[Necrons31467 14,236]

6 hours ago, Flavettes said:

That's why I said that the BMP-3 doesn't really have much of an advantage over the BMP-2, especially since the BMP-2 cannon also fires faster. 

 

Meh, it's a tough call indeed, the BMP-3 has quite a few advantages over the BMP-2, but those few disadvantages are quite harsh as well.

 

• + Superior mobility
• + Superior turret traverse
• + Increased missile load (8 instead of 5)
• + Slightly increased protection
• + Gain a 100mm gun, HE or tube-launched ATGM only  :/
• + Missile-firing device is stabilized

 

• - Can't fire the missile turret-down
• - Lower RPM on the 30
• - Lower penetration on the ATGM*
• - Slower reload on the ATGM (though not 100% sure on that one)

 

* Depends on which ATGM they end up giving it.

 

 

Either way, I'd probably put both the BMP-2 and BMP-3 around about the same BR of ≈8.0 if they'd ever be implemented.

[Flavettes 1,101]

2 hours ago, Necrons31467 said:

 

Meh, it's a tough call indeed, the BMP-3 has quite a few advantages over the BMP-2, but those few disadvantages are quite harsh as well.

 

• + Superior mobility
• + Superior turret traverse
• + Increased missile load (8 instead of 5)
• + Slightly increased protection
• + Gain a 100mm gun, HE or tube-launched ATGM only  :/
• + Missile-firing device is stabilized

 

• - Can't fire the missile turret-down
• - Lower RPM on the 30
• - Lower penetration on the ATGM*
• - Slower reload on the ATGM (though not 100% sure on that one)

 

* Depends on which ATGM they end up giving it.

 

 

Either way, I'd probably put both the BMP-2 and BMP-3 around about the same BR of ≈8.0 if they'd ever be implemented.

 

Don't forget that it's also a much bigger vehicle and will probably still have hullbreak. I guess it could absorb a bunch of shots in its frontal fuel tank so its frontal armor is actually better than just the sheer thickness of the armor plates alone, but even considering all the advantages it seems that BMP-3 should only be 0.3 BR higher than the BMP-2 and neither of them truly belong at above 9.0. They're both IFVs stuck in a tank-centric environment and deprived of objectives that IFVs Excel at. At least the BMP-3 won't be a downgrade like the Obj. 906 -> BMP-1 so I'm not complaining about that.

 

Edited April 16, 2018 by Flavettes

[JEI2 5,766]

+1

 

Does the 100mm gun have only HE shells? (and those ATGM's :P)

[WulfPack 1,693]

Just now, JEI2 said:

+1

 

Does the 100mm gun have only HE shells? (and those ATGM's :P)

Only HE-Frag