Why is the BMP-3 such a piece of shit? >Be in ROK army >regiment

>>32045850
>See that armor is garbage

it is supposed to be light to be air dropable

>Has shit gun
>Terrible optics
south korea could easily fix it

Why?
It's Russian!

It's also really cheap.

My question is if the ROK has them why haven't they improved them somehow? Or are they opfor for training.

File: 1405041833_t-80-v-koree.png (713KB, 877x546px) Image search: [Google]

713KB, 877x546px

>>32045889
We also have a T-80U regiment where we use them for training purposes. Only the worst of the conscripts get T-80s cuz they are absolute garbage tank.

>>32045850
>Has shit gun
What one?

Why does the ROK have Soviet stuff?

File: a_560x375.jpg (47KB, 560x375px) Image search: [Google]

47KB, 560x375px

>>32045877
>airdroppable "armor"
>amphibious "armor"

>>32045850

Which BMP model is the good one - I thought the west collectively shit its pants when it first saw these things, and apparently they can't even stand up to sand niggers?

>>32046973
The bmp1 with its 73 mm gun and ATGM was pretty revolutionnary in it's doctrine at the time but it's gun got outdated crazy fast. The bmp2 was and somewhat still is a pretty good IFV but people laugh at it when it doesn't take hits like a tank would. Keep in mind most western RECENT ifv can maybe take 30mm to the front and 14.5 to the sides. Slat armour can defeat cheap rpgs.

>>32045850
Because Russians don't care about its crew and they sold shit tier equipment to pay off its debt to South Korea.

And if you did serve as a slave in South Korean Army, you should know how corrupt and incomepent the bastards are. The Russians probably paid off the higher ups so that they can pay off their debt with cheap shit machinery that they don't use any more.

>>32046919
Russia couldn't pay off its debts so gave the gooks tanks and BMPs instead.

>>32045850
>literal death trap

K200 KIFV

File: 1476288058158.jpg (33KB, 480x564px) Image search: [Google]

33KB, 480x564px

>>32045850

Isn't the BMP-3 the one that has shit in its armor that makes it more flammable?

BMP was revolutionary when it first came about. But it's primary purpose was 1) Allowing infantry to keep pace with tanks. 2) Do so in an NBC environment. Beyond that they didn't put much effort into it's performance. They figured quantity would trump quality once again.

>>32045850
don't forget the horrible ergonomics (skip to 0:24)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_OMF7zehHxY

>>32047462
Eh, desu, K200 was never meant to fight other APCs. It's a combat taxi and that's it.

>>32047490
>IFV

Not knowing the definition for IFV.

Kek

Also death trap because driver died during testings.

>>32047490
>It's a combat taxi and that's it.

That is what an APC is for dumbdumb. Not IFV.

>>32047048
>The bmp2 was and somewhat still is a pretty good IFV but people laugh at it when it doesn't take hits like a tank would.
lol no BMP-2 is an outdated piece of shit that would get absolutely wrecked if it faced any post-1990 IFV. The armor is a joke and crew survivability in case of a hit is non-existent.
Still love it tho.

t. BMP-2 crewman

>>32047509
>>32047517

But the K200 is an APC. Nobody ever thought of using it as an IFV.

>>32046938

>2016
>not being able to be air dropped or cross a river

enjoy being funneled into killzones

Rpg-7

>>32047474
Well, the soldiers inside literally sit on the fuel tank so yeah. Pretty much.

>>32045877
>it is supposed to be light to be air dropable

No, that's the BMD-3.

The BMP-3 is an IFV like the Bradley.

File: 1381519499863.jpg (21KB, 550x351px) Image search: [Google]

21KB, 550x351px

>>32045850
>Has shit gun
>M3 Bradley is superior.
Wat. The Bradley only has a pistol attached. Also, the M3 can only carry 2 troops. Why would you compare it to anything? That shyte has no right to exist.

>>32046938
The swimming Patria AMV has more armor than the non swimming Stryker.

>>32047460
What was the debt from? An IOU for backing the norks and splitting their country in half?

>>32046919
>Why does the ROK have Soviet stuff?

http://imgur.com/a/pvOM8

Second result on google.

You're welcome.

>>32047456
>And if you did serve as a slave in South Korean Army

Libertarian please go

>The Russians probably paid off the higher ups so that they can pay off their debt with cheap shit machinery that they don't use any more

If that were actually true then why do they so desperately want them back? Also, the russians still use the BMP3 you moron.

>>32045850

>armor
>garbage

Because they aren't meant to be sitting out in the open? The idea is you get fire support where it's needed. Not using the BMP-3 as cover. It's less of an IFV and more of a fire support system with occupancy.

Plus they cost like 1/4 of a western IFV.

Russia should donate some of them to the SAA, I would like to see them operating in the Syrian countryside

>>32047888

Thats because the Stryker is an overfunded underperforming piece of shit that should have never been purchased.

>>32047941
>It's less of an IFV and more of a fire support system with occupancy.

That is what an IFV is.

It's an APC that can give you fire support and kill other APC's.

>>32047954

That would mean donating their "best" combat vehicles in inventory.

File: 2A70.webm (907KB, 854x480px) Image search: [Google]

907KB, 854x480px

>>32045850
>>32045918
you sound like an underage gook

>>32045850
BMP is standard Russian armor
thicc steel and BEEG GUN that doesn't do a whole lot but
>M3 Bradley is superior.
>Bradley being superior to even a truck with duct taped Dhsk on back
This is bait

File: 1479561457.jpg (35KB, 850x478px) Image search: [Google]

35KB, 850x478px

ROKA T-80s look quite awesome and they're actually well regarded. Unfortunately they'll be phased out within a few years though.

File: 0e75df81f191.jpg (119KB, 1200x675px) Image search: [Google]

119KB, 1200x675px

>>32045850
still better than the K-21
>The soldiers and the technician were inside the K21 when it fell into a reservoir. The Doosan official and the enlisted soldier escaped. Rescue workers salvaged the vehicle three hours later and found the NCO dead inside it.

>>32045850
It's not great, but it's cheap, and you get what you pay for.

More importantly though, it's still better than anything that Best Korea can deploy in a similar role.

>>32048517
>>32048527

K-21s aren't really all that bad. They have better frontal armor than the BMP-3, but lack the BMP's firepower.

File: file.png (1MB, 1238x825px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1238x825px

>>32045850
>>See that armor is garbage
Cheeks: ~50mm Aluminium = 25mm RHAe
Upper sides: ~43mm Aluminum = ~21.5mm RHAe
Lower sides: ~43mm Aluminium = ~21.5mm RHAe

Rear hatches: ~40mm Aluminium = ~24mm RHAe
Rear top hatches: ~10mm RHA = ~6mm RHAe
Rear upper corners: ~16mm Aluminium = ~9.6mm RHAe
Rear engine compartment: ~26mm Aluminium = ~15.6mm RHAe

Roof: ~20mm Aluminium = ~10mm RHAe
Roof: ~16mm Aluminium + 3mm RHA = ~12.6mm RHAe
Belly: N/A, At least resistant to all anti-personnel mines

Turret frontal arc: ~50mm Aluminium + ~9mm RHA + ~70mm airgap @ 60° = ~50mm-60mm RHAe
Turret rear arc: ~20mm Aluminium = ~12mm RHAe

enough to take direct hit from western 25mm machine gun
>>Has shit gun
2A70 is a low pressure gun, it is close to a mortar than a tank gun, though it have gun launch ATGM( ROK army want Russia missile tech, but not buying Russia missile)
>>Terrible optics
agree

>>32048514
They really are not.

Shit NV, shit accuracy.

>>32048534
>enough to take direct hit from western 25mm machine gun

Not even ye olde M971. M919 does more.

File: vladimir_putin.jpg (15KB, 424x288px) Image search: [Google]

15KB, 424x288px

>be inna Baghdad in 07
>have engineers plow hole in 3 story tall berm to give alternate route for allied forces.
>IA decide to setup military checkpoint at the hole for "security"
>stop one day to inspect their "fortifications"
>see hella fucking clean BMP-1. doesn't look like shit like every other Track they have
>talk to IA soldiers about the BMP
>BMP-1 has no engine, no batteries, no ammo, Just there for show.
>ask how the fuck they got it there if it had no engine.
>weeeeeelllllll.....it did have an engine, but they pulled it out to put into another BMP-1 as soon as they parked it
>about that time I noticed a ZPU-2 on the very top of the berm.
>asked IA about that
>said it's for shooting people
>has no ammo either.

>MFW talking to these MF

>two months later the local militia we were fighting rolled through, killed all the IA at the CP and took whatever they could, including the ZPU

>rolled through shortly after and that BMP-1 was still there, lol.

>>32048546
Accuracy depend only from crew dumb gook
If you can't aim with you chink eyes that's your problem

>>32048634

>BMP-1

No wonder. It wasn't even remotely armoured against modern arms. It was made to be proof against 5.56 and nothing else. Fit the Russian idea of having the IFV just be there to support the unit inside long enough for them to deploy and then bug out.

Which is STILL their thing today with BMP-3s.

>>32045850
Bradleys are great until they get hit by and EFP and melt to the ground after decapitating two of the dismounts..

>>32045850

>armour is garbage

But they never said that.

>gun is shit

Nope. They praised the merits and complained about accuracy of what is essentially a mortar with ATGM potential.

>terrible optics

About right for Russia.

>death trap

Every IFV ever against a force of non-arabs that can issue ATGM and RPGs from post 1980 developments.

BMP-2/3 will have a longer life than the Bradley purely on one merit. They aren't designed around killing other IFVs. They are designed to scoot in while protecting their occupants and deploy them.

Bradleys are designed around hunting and killing other IFVs and potential tanks. BMP are designed around disgorging their occupants and then fucking off out of the fire fight with the POTENTIAL to kill other armoured vehicles if they get an opportunity.

Thats why Bradleys are approaching 35 tonnes with all their addons and BMP-3s are half that and a shitton faster.

They fulfill different doctrines and requirements.

>>32045877
>>Has shit gun
>>Terrible optics
>south korea could easily fix it
not worth it since it would make the BMP-3's retarded supply chain even more convoluted

>>32048678
Stop bullshiting, BMP-1 is protected from .50 in the front and 7.62 everywhere else.
>>32048546
Compared to what?
If you're comparing it to more modern systems, no shit.

>>32048668
Spot the mad Vatniks.

LOL

>>32048783
>"WOW LOOK AT THIS DUMB VATNIK"

I hate whenever this happens in /k/ discussion of Russian equipment and doctrine. Shut up, you stopped being funny a long time ago.

>>32048678
>No wonder. It wasn't even remotely armoured against modern arms.
It actually is.

Front being immune to .50bmg AP unless its SLAP or autocannons like those on the Bradley (which are newer then the BMP) and the sides immune to small arms fire and to .50bmg AP from a distance of 400 meters.

And I guess the militia could not take the BMP-1 since it had no engine, ammo or batteries.

File: 1457873387265.jpg (315KB, 770x513px) Image search: [Google]

315KB, 770x513px

>>32045850
Insides

File: 1457873456224.jpg (314KB, 770x513px) Image search: [Google]

314KB, 770x513px

>>32048805

File: 1457873528213.jpg (309KB, 770x513px) Image search: [Google]

309KB, 770x513px

>>32048835
gunner's seat

File: bmp3.jpg (471KB, 1280x854px) Image search: [Google]

471KB, 1280x854px

>>32048840
dismount's point of view

File: l10032-bmp-3-interior-9187.jpg (23KB, 620x348px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 620x348px

>>32048852

File: bmp-3-1-35-um-8.jpg (803KB, 2048x1536px) Image search: [Google]

803KB, 2048x1536px

>>32048865

File: bmp3-14.jpg (38KB, 640x480px) Image search: [Google]

38KB, 640x480px

>>32048869

File: img20121212154154465.jpg (154KB, 1200x800px) Image search: [Google]

154KB, 1200x800px

>>32045850
>See that armor is garbage

Well, Anon you can always upgrade it.

File: 10122319a.jpg (147KB, 990x668px) Image search: [Google]

147KB, 990x668px

>>32048943

File: 1327084343_05.jpg (289KB, 1254x900px) Image search: [Google]

289KB, 1254x900px

>>32048943

>>32047567
Where from?

>>32048800
Its not immune to 25mm from any angle, any anti armor ammo

>>32049690
>.50 AP
>25mm
two different things there bud

>>32045850
What unit were you in?

>>32045850
>Terrible optics

Looking at the picture, don't ROK use the really early model of BMP-3 with 1D16-3 rangefinder and 1K13-2 sight combination?

The Russians replaced those rather quickly with the SOZh sight (because the initial sight/rangefinder configuration was unreliable) and the most modern ones since the 90s have a Vesna-K thermal sight

WTF, why is Zerg nation using shitty commie hardware? I thought you guys where Allies of Freedom.

>>32050452
Russia paid of debt with stuff in the 90's
I know a guy that got paid in tractor and lada's for fish
t. icelander

>>32049690
>or autocannons like those on the Bradley

>>32050452
>I am 12 years old: the post