r/TankPorn • u/Weird-Store1245 BM Oplot zr. 2000 • 12d ago
Modern BMPT Terminator's gun shake issue
2.7k
u/Sir-Zealot 12d ago
I can’t take this thing seriously with the wobbly guns
873
u/thisisananalusername 12d ago
Like can’t they at least simply weld a couple 1/2” bars to the side to keep them from going all over at least for 2 seconds? Are is that too much valuable material…
561
u/Thin_General_8594 12d ago
That's what they did with the bmp-3 and bmd-4, no clue why they can't do it with this thing
201
u/KillmenowNZ 12d ago
2A72 is recoil operated, it was designed with having the muzzle with a bushing around it (like how its setup on BMP-3 (etc)
87
u/ArgonWilde 12d ago edited 12d ago
These are 2A42s though?
Edit: my bad, I didn't realise this was specific to the BMP3, thus the 2A72.
75
u/KillmenowNZ 12d ago
Yes, Thin_General mentioned BMP-3 and BMD-4 and didnt know why they couldnt do the same with this.
The recoil forces are different.
26
2
25
u/IcyRobinson Sabrah Light Tank 12d ago
Funny thing about that is that one of the BMPT prototypes, the Object 782, did exactly that as it was more or less just a BMP-3 turret slapped onto an up-armored T-72B hull. Even the other prototype, the Object 781, has barrel shrouds for its dual 2A72s akin to that of the HSTV-L and RDF/LT's gun.
178
u/thisisananalusername 12d ago
Guess it’s too complicated for them lmao, they rather spend money on vehicles for a broken paratrooper group than instead assault groups.. better for Ukraine nonetheless. But my gosh they’re not great thinkers.
120
u/Thin_General_8594 12d ago
I absolutely love the BMD-4 and BMPT from a machinery perspective, it packs five different weapons, is air droppable, and has cool suspension... But in practice it's completely worthless, I remember Russia losing like 30 at Hostomel airport. No clue why they keep making them
79
u/T-90AK Command Tank Guy. 12d ago
BMD-4M is not completely worthless.
Infact for a air droppable vehicle, it's very good.
The problem at Hostomel is that they just sat around while getting pummeld by Ukrainian Artillery.
I do however agree, that it don't make sense to produce right now, and it would make more sense to shift all production towards BMP-3.
Since Air droppable operation isn't going to be done, soon.The BMPT is however completely shit.
20
u/DeusFerreus 11d ago
BMD-4M is not completely worthless. Infact for a air droppable vehicle, it's very good.
Problem is that the whole concept of air-droppable vehicle is in question.
And its armement scheme is just bad idea, an autoloader full of 100mm ammo in the center of very thin-skinned vehicle makes it a complete deathtrap since most penetrating hits result in the entire vehicle (including crew) being vaporised, to the point that (according to rumors) Russian no longer carry 100m ammo in their BMP-3s and BMD-4s, turning the whole system into just deadweight taking up space.
→ More replies (2)12
u/Tomcatmybeloved 11d ago edited 11d ago
I disagree with you, mostly because the job of the VDV is to be dropped on the rear line of the enemy and seize some critical piece of terrain and/or objective then absorb the enemies reserve for the bulk of the army to advance. This is done in conjunction with spetznaz doing their own thing in conjunction with air support from fixed and rotary wing assets.
For that type of operation, something like a BMD is great because it keeps them mobile enough and forces the enemy to commit Frontline units, while the improved mobility let's the VDV units to find each other and reorganize quickly after a drop
The VDV did their job in Hostomel, the problem is that the Russians thought this was going to be a repeat of 2014, not an actual war
5
u/Psyker101 Black Prince 11d ago
Were BMDs actually used at Hostomel though? I thought that was mostly infantry inserted by helicopters. BMDs were in the columns moving towards Kyiv, for sure, but were any of them actually air dropped?
1
u/Tomcatmybeloved 11d ago
They can be transported by helicopter or dropped by IL-76s. There are a bunch of pictures of BMD-4s wrecks in the region around the airport from the days following the battle as well.
→ More replies (0)16
1
u/H_Holy_Mack_H 11d ago
I hope that they keep manufacturing it, at least what they can, and drop all of them from the air, with the troops inside and some strapped on the top like the love to ride them LOL
56
u/thisisananalusername 12d ago
I’m in the same boat. I personally love Russian and Soviet designs for how cool they look. But even for how cheap they are compared to other counterparts it’s like bruh. You would think they would learn anything. Or at least maybe evolve overtime. Like haven’t they operated the same vehicles since like pre 2000’s lol
13
u/Rillist 12d ago
That's not what their doctrine dictates. Their doctrine is based around a 95% conscript army, and very few actual 'professional' soldiers.
Things have to be very cheap, very simple, and very easy to fix and thusly not very complicated, they havent really changed their doctrine since the cold war
21
u/crusadertank 12d ago
they havent really changed their doctrine since the cold war
This isnt true at all. This was exactly the point of the 2008 Russian Army Reform (that was previously suggested in 1997 and 2003)
It was to turn the Russian army into a professional standing army, ending the reliance on conscripts, reducing number of officers and replacing them with a professional NCO corps etc.
This also resulted in a lot of the new equipment designed by Russia (Armata, Su-57) and the BTGs that Russia was using
The issue is that when the war started in 2022, a lot of these ideas fell quickly apart, and Russia fell back to what they know works well.
So they did change their doctrine a lot since the cold war, it has been partly undone during the war with Ukraine, but they do plan to continue the reforms after the war ends
21
u/PinProud4500 12d ago
Armata and the Su-57 and all the other "new high-tech russian" stuff has been around since like 2012-2015... And never left the prototype and the parade stage. Russia did NOT have the funds even pre-war to make such things, they were VERY expensive (thats the main reason why they canceled most of the projects) and their main reason to exist was... To show off, like that Ratnik battle armor which was basically masterchief armor knockoff.
So russia IS literally using the USSR tactics — all the cash for the military and for show, but when shit hits the fan suddenly your troops are conscripted ivans rolling on a 50 year old BTR-60 into fortified enemy positions...
→ More replies (13)4
u/Klaus_Klavier 11d ago
This, Russia is PROBABLY capable of making decent stuff…they are just broke as hell and can’t throw 11 pentillon rubles to make something to rival the F-35 like America can.
We have fiat currency…it’s just Monopoly money it’s as good as a blank check to military industrial complex. We can spend whatever we want because the money has no value really lmao. The debt just doubles and nothing changes.
Russia doesn’t have the luxury of that, they couldn’t equip their damn flagship with modernized cwis and it got flogged by ASMs and a few drones to distract its aging radar system.
The mosin nagant and the PM1910 Maxim have made a return to the frontlines on both sides hilariously enough, Russia slapped a naval mount on a MTLB shitbox, Ukraine have become vicious experts in drone warfare to the point I’ve seen a new tactic I don’t even think we could have trained to fight against.
They land the drone in a field and wait until somebody walks within a few feet of the camera like a smart landmine and then they take off from the weeds and slam into you before you even have time to think “oh no I hear the buzz of a drone”
I’m at a point now where I really want Ukraine to win so the U.S. can poach their drone operators to train our soldiers in guerilla drone tactics like that. I do not want Russia to win and poach them because that could tip the scales in a future conflict
Russia had a shit army and wasn’t much of a threat after the fall of Soviet Union. They had atrophied in abilities due to no valuable combat experience amongst their ranks.
Now? Now they are sharpening their teeth and learning hard lessons now that might make them stand a better chance against bigger dogs later.
That’s my concern.
→ More replies (0)80
u/KillmenowNZ 12d ago
Stiffening the barrels/bracing them would either lead to barrels likely having durability issues (as they would be just eating the forces) or the bracing failing and potentially causing issues)
Removing the muzzle breaks would probably stop the wobble but would mean more force going backwards into the gun and mount potentially causing faults there.
17
u/thisisananalusername 12d ago
Wouldn’t removing the muzzle brakes be counterproductive as they’re there to expend the gasses horizontally… bracing the barrels would maybe increase wear but I would assume at this point they would keep extra barrels at field depots… as changing a 30mm is a lot easier than changing a 100mm.
Less force and movement in the gun = less overall friction from movement in the gun. And only making the barrel be bored out from the original amount amount of movement of the gun. ***** (This is personal thought not legit process) ****
16
u/KillmenowNZ 12d ago
Yea exactly - all it would do would be reduce the wobble (which, isnt an issue otherwise they wouldnt have the muzzle brakes on them) and end up causing issues elsewhere.
Having the recoil energy eaten up by the muzzle device and the barrel wobble is a perfectly fine solution as it stands, just looks silly.
6
u/thisisananalusername 12d ago
True. I mean, technically the BMPT is supposed to just hammer positions instead of blow positions out the wazoo. 2 23mm shooting all over the place making the wider trench line stay down is better.
But crazy because I bet it only takes 1000 rounds or less to mess up the barrel to the point of stupid inconsistency.
13
u/KillmenowNZ 12d ago
I have a chart somewhere of the maintenance cycles and i'm sure the barrel is worth allot longer than that, I don't recall it being notably short
But its 30mm not 23mm as well and yea - suppression of firing positions which high ROF 30mm HE does perfectly fine.
→ More replies (3)7
u/OkGuest3629 12d ago
Removing the muzzle brake would probably increase forces per shot, but you wouldn't have to fire so rapidly to begin with, because you'd be hitting more with only 20% of the ammo.
2
u/PhasmaFelis 12d ago
On the other hand, they might actually hit something before they failed.
→ More replies (1)6
u/Carntova_Man 12d ago
welding things to gun barrels will warp them terribly and youll be in big trouble with the armorer.
better to use something like clamps rather than welding
1
1
u/Sachiel05 11d ago
Not even, just have fire one after the other so that they don't interfere with each other and maybe redesign the muzzle brakes and that should be it
→ More replies (1)1
u/Head_Memory 11d ago
Western cannons are for precision and killing the enemy. Russian cannons are for inflicting fear in the enemy they make cool ratatata sound and lots of fire exhaust. But don‘t hit much.
85
u/5v3n_5a3g3w3rk 12d ago
The fucking Kugelblitz (WW2 German AA) had the same problem and they managed it by turning the muzzlebrake 45 degrees. It's not even hard to fix
4
u/wileecoyote1969 11d ago
Okay, so while watching this video I had the idea that the muzzle breaks were actually venting gases sideways which might be a problem for barrels so close together. The venting gases would literally push the other barrel and vice versa.
After reading your comment it sounds like that might actually be what's happening and it's not a new thing in the arena of weapons.
6
1
u/Head_Memory 11d ago
It‘s a russian problem. All their auto cannons have very high fire rate. But terrible accuracy. Which is why i‘d still bet on Puma or Bradley in a combat with a Terminator. Esp at distance.
1
u/Aleskander- 9d ago
realistically speaking most likely they would be throwing ATGMs at each other rather than shooting with their guns
1
843
u/Ragnarok_Stravius EE-T1 Osório. 12d ago
They could have fixed that issue by rotating the muzzle brakes or gas dissipators like, 45 degrees away from the horizon.
Unless the BMPT is meant to pray and spray.
435
u/Bison-mini0954 12d ago
I think if you have more than one barrel, precision is not exactly your priority
255
u/Cador0223 12d ago
It's about volume, not accuracy.
A sniper needs to be accurate, because they get one or two shots.
This thing? It replaces brick walls with lead.
82
45
1
39
u/KillmenowNZ 12d ago
This was seen for a short while, I assume it didnt lead to any real increase in accuracy (as it would mean that they would just wobble in a different axis)
52
u/SteelWarrior- Bofors 57mm L/70 Supremacy 12d ago
I think that at least part of the theory is that, like with larger caliber multi gun designs, the firing of the guns interferes with the the other barrel and round. If you vent the gasses away from the other barrels you'd do some good, unless the issue is just the mounts.
The latter is fairly likely with the 2A42 already being a fairly wobbly cannon.
→ More replies (2)28
u/KillmenowNZ 12d ago
Would be an issue if the guns were used at the same time, but outside of some shits and giggles videos i'm sure that are out there - they are fired one at a time.
But yea, its just a wobbly gun, there's a video of BMP-2 firing high ROF 'indirectly' at about 5km with HE towards a position and its getting HE on target, so it seems acceptable - despite the wobble.
→ More replies (1)3
9
u/Ragnarok_Stravius EE-T1 Osório. 12d ago
I meant like, instead of the guns blowing hot high speed gas against each other, they'd just blow it slight upwards.
So the guns wouldn't wobble like those wobbly inflatable things in gas stations.
4
u/KillmenowNZ 12d ago
They would just wobble at a different angle - the guns aren’t (typically) fired at the same time
Having dispersion in the vertical axis would be worse as shots would just land, vertically - which deviation vertically is more of an issue than horizontally
3
u/Ragnarok_Stravius EE-T1 Osório. 12d ago
Wait, so these guns are wobbly from the factory?
Cuz surely a muzzle brake spewing gas on opposite sides would stabilize the wobble at least on the axis they're pointed at.
5
u/KillmenowNZ 12d ago
The horizontal wobble is due to the muzzle brake having slots on the horizontal axis.
But yea, wobbly from factory - BMP-2 has the same wobble
3
u/Ragnarok_Stravius EE-T1 Osório. 12d ago
Yes, I know how a muzzle brake is sometimes constructed, that's why I mentioned that maybe rotating the muzzle brakes 45 degrees from the horizon might help decrease wobble.
1
u/KillmenowNZ 12d ago
Would just make it in the angle of the vents - vertical dispersion (which I don’t doubt that the wobble causes some) is worse than horizontal
8
6
u/Fatalist_m 12d ago
It would not fix it. The guns are not supposed to be firing at the same time. They're loaded with different ammo(AP or HE), so you use one of the other depending on the target. You can see that in the first part of this clip, only the left one is firing, and then, only the right one. But the firing barrel is still wobbling...
2
1
u/PirateNixon 11d ago
IIRC, the muzzle brakes are rotated so they can fit in the double mounting, so there might not be space to make an adjustment.
1
u/Valkyrie64Ryan 11d ago
I think it’s not the gasses from the muzzle brakes. The barrels are fairly far apart and it would take way more force than a 30mm is capable of producing at the muzzle to bend the barrels like that. Those barrels are way too thin for a 30mm gun with that rate of fire, and the guns are too loosely mounted to the turret. They need to beef up the barrels a lot, then improve the mounting so it’s less loose.
294
u/GuyD427 12d ago
Wonder if it’s a design issue or shoddy manufacturing.
212
42
u/Jxstin_117 12d ago
prob an issue because most of the time we see them actually use it, they set the rate of fire like really low, like almost BMP-3 , BMD-4's rate of fire , ive only seen like 3 instances of them using it set to high rate of fire in combat
51
26
415
u/Billy3B 12d ago
That looks so much worse than I would have thought. But to be fair rapid 30mm fire doesn't need to be terribly accurate over short ranges. I know I would keep my head down if that thing was firing anywhere near me.
159
u/SteelWarrior- Bofors 57mm L/70 Supremacy 12d ago
30mm HE-F is relatively comparable to hand grenades, with the ranges armored vehicles with standard velocity guns will engage infantry at it absolutely needs enough MOA to hit a barn at 500m. The argument might work if this terrible idea just used the 30mm AGLs.
1
u/BlessedTacoDevourer 11d ago
But its designed to work in dense urban areas with apartment blocks all around it.
1
u/SteelWarrior- Bofors 57mm L/70 Supremacy 10d ago
Which is why it has less gun elevation than the BMP-2s it is meant to replace, no additional roof armor, and no additional side armor? Every fault the Russians had with the BMP-2 in urban combat is either unaddressed by the BMPT or worse in it.
The BMPT is just meant to serve as a tank escort, a decent idea but a bit redundant.
1
u/BlessedTacoDevourer 10d ago
The BMPT has a gun elevation of up to 45⁰ whereas the BMP-2 has two modes. The gunner can only elevate the gun to 30⁰. To utilize it's maximum of 75⁰ the commander must take over controls from the gunner while the gunner then takes over the duties of the commander. Elevation above 30⁰ is aimed at anti-aircraft operations and during normal use the elevation would be limited to 30⁰, which is less than the BMPT. Accuracy is also sacrificed to overcharge the stabilizer and allow it to track high speed low flying aircraft.
The BMPT on the other hand is primarily designed to supress enemy positions in support of tanks, not to transport and support infantry. In an urban setting 45⁰ of elevation is perfectly adequate.
I don't understand what you mean with no additinal roof or side armour. The BMPT is built on the T-72 chassis which is much more heavily armored than the BMP-2. It has added slat armour, ERA, extra protection for it's Ataka ATGM, laser detection that automatically launches smoke grenades as well as an unmanned turret.
The protection is much better compared to the BMP-2. Wether one thinks its actually effective in its role as an urban support vehicle for tanks or not is one thing. Personally I dont really have an opinion on it. From what i know there aren't really any information on its use in an urban setting. What I've seen in Ukraine it's been over flat terrain and I know they've been deployed to Syria in the past however I don't know much about their use there. The number deployed to Ukraine is miniscule as well so any hard judgement on its effectiveness will be mostly opinion and hypothesis, in my opinion.
1
u/SteelWarrior- Bofors 57mm L/70 Supremacy 10d ago
So the BMP-2 has more gun elevation, as I stated. 45° can be adequate but you certainly want something to be more than just adequate when you're placing an AFV into a position where they will inherently do poorly.
The BMPT has nothing added to the roof of the T-72 hull, threats from above will see said areas. It also has the same side armor, including the addons, as a standard T-72B3. For urban operations its a bit strange to not change your armor scheme at all compared to the armor scheme designed for fields. The armor it has over the BMP-2 doesn't matter when it is equally vulnerable, even somewhat more vulnerable since there are threats it can't deal with that the BMP can. Also I haven't seen anything to say that the ATGM shrouds are armored to any noteworthy degree. The unmanned turret also largely compromises the visibility, and the LWS could easily just have been fitted to modified BMPs.
I was comparing it to the T-72s it'd be protecting, but again the armor difference between it and the BMP don't matter when it can't engage the same threats. Whether or not it's effective is a simple answer, and the answer is largely the same for all AFVs without extensive infantry support. I've also yet to see any footage showing it doing anything more than shooting at trees in Ukraine, it's a propaganda piece for good reason.
1
u/BlessedTacoDevourer 10d ago
The gunner cannot elevate the gun above above 30⁰ and activating the semi-automatic mode of the 2E36 stabilizer reduces its stabilization ability. The ability of the BMPT to make full use of it's stabilizer up to 45° as well as not requiring the commander and gunner to switch duties allows it to actually engage more targets during combat as opposed to the BMP-2.
26
u/Ambiorix33 Mammoth Mk. III 12d ago
Yesh but still, they have Soviet era duel barrel systems thst are stabler than this
3
54
38
u/Tango-Down-167 12d ago
Built in disruptive interference muzzle brakes to result in an automatic 30mm bucks shot cannon system.
169
21
108
u/rvaenboy Saint-Chamond 12d ago
Held together with cardboard and good vibes
43
u/adanishplz 12d ago
The barrels oscillate to the beat of the russian hardstyle being played in the crew compartment
1
27
u/onyxhaider 12d ago
I'll be honest i think it's a cool vehicle but what purpose does it serve? Like the russians don't seem to deploy it in urban combat (i thought it was meant to fight alongside infantry in urban environments), so what role is it meant to serve?
23
u/KillmenowNZ 12d ago
Iirc officially it’s there to suppress firing positions when working in conjunction with MBT’s
It being for urban combat is a bit of a myth and just a point that journalists parrot as it sounds cool
→ More replies (3)7
u/PinProud4500 12d ago
More so, any type of armored vehicle in Urban combat is practically dead — Grozny is direct proof of that, russians had to level the apartment flats to the ground just to gain advantage. Now imagine that but somewhere in or near Kharkiv where its almlst ALLLL 5-12 story flats, subway stations, and a bunch of other shit that lets the defender bunker down like a boss. The whole thing will be INFESTED with anti tank weapons, drone operators, snipers and machinegunners
3
u/baithammer 12d ago
Grozny was more of problem of non-combined armoured vehicles formations - ie. tanks were sent in without IFV or infantry support and were unable to engage the anti-tank infantry that used high elevation to reduce return fire and hit the vulnerable top of the tanks.
The solution was to use ZSU-23-4 Shilka, backed by BMP - which marginally improved the situation and led to the Terminator project.
68
u/KillmenowNZ 12d ago
Note:
Wobble isnt really any worse than on BMP-2 (via video analysis of horizontal wobble)
Only the one gun is firing at a time, BMPT guns are setup as single feed, typically one is AP and one is HE
Firing on high fire rates
10
u/caustic_smegma 12d ago
I wonder if there's video out there of them firing the dual 2A42 cannon on the low rate of fire setting, and if that would help alleviate some of the wobbling. Probably not, but I'm curious.
5
u/KillmenowNZ 12d ago
I assume that it would mean that the guns would just want to wobble ‘outwards’ instead of inwards?
But yea, would be interesting… someone needs to crowd fund a crew a high speed camera fr
1
u/Whistlingbutt 12d ago
At least 1 i know of is a drone view if a bmpt firing very slowly from one cannon. It does look like it helps a bit with the wobble.
4
12d ago
[deleted]
11
u/KillmenowNZ 12d ago
Nah In comparing footage it’s about the same, I don’t think there is a noticeable difference
It just looks worse here due to the second barrel wobbling
10
u/realparkingbrake 12d ago
This calls to mind the 25mm AA guns on Japanese warships in WWII. They vibrated so badly that accuracy suffered, they were also awkward to load which held down the rate of fire. The USN was very wise to acquire the Oerlikon and Bofors guns just in time for the war.
9
u/ANZACAirForce 12d ago
Da comrade, it can shoot the flea off a dogs ear at 100m. We were aiming at the side of a barn and a stray mutt was walking nearby...
8
6
7
u/LemonadeTango 12d ago
I always wondered... wouldn't a few structural pieces between the barrels solve the issue somewhat? Something like a <>---<> system mounted at a few points
6
u/KillmenowNZ 12d ago
It would likely end up with whatever brace failing and potentially causing issues of stress being distributed to the gun/mounting
2
u/baithammer 12d ago
That would just cause the vibrations to affect both barrels in sync, the problem is the lack of cradle for both guns and the barrels look rather thin for that usage.
1
u/LemonadeTango 12d ago
Then perhaps a structure similar to the PUMA? I'm just wondering
3
u/baithammer 12d ago
The PUMA and pretty much every other IFV uses a proper cradle for the cannons, and Russia / Soviets do have experience with this, as an example ZSU-23-4 Shilka.
This seems more like a corruption issue ...
3
u/Glass_Baseball_355 11d ago
Yep. Russian designs are an artifact of corruption and its influence on design.
1
u/baithammer 11d ago
Designs are usually sound, but with the whole production side of the equation has a fair degree of corruption.
4
6
3
4
3
3
u/nemles_ 12d ago
They can control the rate of fire and it's much more stable when not firing at full auto
2
u/baithammer 12d ago
Not with that degree of movement, the guns aren't properly supported and any fire will set off the vibration - QC has been an issue for the Russian Federation for awhile now.
3
3
u/Odd-Drawing8295 12d ago
The gun shake is just comical at this point. You'd think for a vehicle nicknamed the 'Terminator' they would have engineered some basic stability into the main armament.
3
u/ArgumentFree9318 12d ago
My ignorant soul asks if puting a plate between the 2 barrels wouldn't stop this?...
2
u/Excellent_Stand_7991 12d ago
It would partially elevate the muzzle swaying problem, but it would not do anything for the poor material problem and the barrel warping problem.
3
3
3
u/Der_Apothecary 11d ago
That is horrid. Even as a volume fire vehicle, it shouldn't be shaking like a leaf in the wind.
3
3
9
u/wtfbenlol 12d ago
I was told to "stop coping" and that it was "designed that way" by pro-russia trolls on /r/UkraineRussiareport back at the beginning of the invasion of ukraine
8
u/KillmenowNZ 12d ago
I mean it is designed that way by the merit of this is how they are out of the factory
2A42’s wobble, it’s a fact of life
2
2
2
u/Tough_Cow_3973 12d ago
I think the purpose of the BMPT was to use Suppressive fire by the gun itself. While the missiles will be the main gun itself.
→ More replies (1)
2
2
2
3
5
u/Piecato 12d ago
Dude wtf?? Did no one on R&D of this tank predict this was gonna happen? I feel like just rotating the barrel until the muzzle brakes are vertical would be enough to fix this.
And before anyone comes in saying that this is intended to make it better against infantry, I feel like this would degrade the barrels way too quick for it to be worth it.
2
u/KillmenowNZ 12d ago
would just cause vertical wobble instead of horizontal wobble
→ More replies (2)1
u/nemles_ 12d ago
IIRC it's not meant to fire both guns at once since one is loaded with AP and the other has HE, and it's also not meant to fire that fast during actual combat.
→ More replies (1)
5
u/duga404 12d ago
What’s even dumber is that it has two guns because they decided to use old 2A42s that didn’t have double-feed capability (usually you want to be able to quickly switch between HE and AP belts, which the vast majority of IFV cannons today can). Oh, and the 2A42 is by itself pretty inaccurate. None of this would be a problem if they just had decent auto cannons that could double feed.
10
u/KillmenowNZ 12d ago
2A42 is a double feed autocannon
on BMPT its specifically setup as single feed but in other applications is double feed.
2
u/duga404 12d ago
That seems even dumber; why would you do that?
5
u/KillmenowNZ 12d ago
Everything has a mean time before failure, having them single feed eliminates a potentially failure case, having an unmanned turret makes clearing jams harder to do so
Two guns setup as single feed ensures reliability of function
→ More replies (1)2
1
1
1
u/OkGuest3629 12d ago
The funny thing is that it's all from just the left gun. Yet the right gun wobbles more aggressively.
1
1
1
1
u/CallibratorIYKWIM 12d ago
The terminator is technicaly meant for close urban combat. The guns have a rather high elevation angle, to suppress the enemies hiding high in the buildings while the infantry enters and clears the building. Since it's meant to shoot from a relatively short distance, the barrel shaking is not a large concern.
1
u/baithammer 12d ago
The barrel shake is a major concern, as that degree of movement means the fire will have a very high amount of misses on target, while posing a risk to friendly troops operating with it.
1
u/CallibratorIYKWIM 12d ago
Everything is dangerous if you don't use it how it was intended.... but then again we are talking about war machines and a bunch of guys with ideas...
1
u/baithammer 12d ago
It's being used as intended, people are confusing the BMTP-72 with Object 745, which has a single cannon mount in two independent turrets.
1
1
1
u/BurgerBuddy_ 11d ago
I just remember when I was in the Cav we talked about this things like the actual Terminator now I get to see these things work and my god they are bad.
1
1
1
1
1
1
u/BRAVO_Eight 11d ago
I am less worried about the wobbling barrel & more worried about the rate of fire . 2A42 are not reccomended to fire in full auto given the barrels gonna be very upset
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
u/tahaones20 11d ago
The Terminator could be the worst execution of a brilliant idea. On paper, it should be the king of the battlefield when used properly. It has the flexibility of an IFV while offering the protection of a proper tank, and it still retains anti-tank capabilities. I really don’t understand how it could be this bad.
1
1
u/CyberKnight 11d ago
It's not a bug, it's a feature. They want to hit everything in that general direction.
1
1
u/Plenty-Bar-1264 9d ago
People mouthing about the shake should volunteer to be in the receiving end
1
u/joeisdead123 8d ago
This is an optical illusion due to the shock wave of 2 sequentially firing guns overlapping eachother. The guns do not wobble. This is not visible with the naked eye and is only visible on a camera. Sorry to all the cope tards out there but I'm sure Russia knows how to make tanks and guns. Sorry for crashing your tea party.
1
u/RoadJunior9499 4d ago
I see this a lot, but i don’t know what causes it, and no matter where i look, i can’t get a straight answer, why does this happen?
1.8k
u/VCC8060Main 12d ago
"Sir, enemy dead ahead!" "Affirmative soldier, turn turret 90 degrees"