BMP-1 OR 2 OR MAYBE 3

[marky657]

Since we can now crew the BTR-80 has anyone suggested we be able to man the fighting vehicles BMP-1 etc. I thought I would throw that out there.

[Sky Hunter]

All these IFVs are weak and outdated. Maybe only BMP-3 would be interesting thanks to gun launched ATGM. I would rather suggest playable M1A2SEP to bring the gap with Leo-2A6. Also T-80U would be nice because it is better than T-72M1 especially in FCS and armor protection, if you want more playable stuff on Russian side. However it's too bad Russian industry did not build brand-new armored vehicle types in recent years...

[dejawolf]

yes, it's been suggested multiple times over the years.

also i wouldn't underestimate the BMP-2. even though the 30mm gun is cowdung and couldn't penetrate a wet newspaper, you don't want to joke around with it's konkurs missile.

[DrDevice]

All these IFVs are weak and outdated. Maybe only BMP-3 would be interesting thanks to gun launched ATGM. I would rather suggest playable M1A2SEP to bring the gap with Leo-2A6. Also T-80U would be nice because it is better than T-72M1 especially in FCS and armor protection, if you want more playable stuff on Russian side. However it's too bad Russian industry did not build brand-new armored vehicle types in recent years...

So your argument is "I don't like those vehicles, so build these tanks I like instead?" That's a pretty sad apples to oranges comparison. "Weak" is a VERY relative term. Compared to their contemporaries, they are on par. "Outdated" is just as bad of a counter argument, considering the age of some of the systems just added with the last release. Age of equipment has nothing to do with their value in the game.

For the sake of multiplayer fun and balance, a crewable Soviet-era IFV would be higher on my priority list than yet another high-tech western design.

Even the T-80 isn't in the same class as the M1A2 or Leo2A6, so why not ask for a T-90 or a Chinese Type 98/99? Those would be more on par with an OPFOR-class modern system.

I LOVE the M1A2, but I would find much more utility and game opportunity from a crewable BMP. (No matter how low tech and troublesome they seem to be.)

[enigma6584]

+2 regarding DrDevice's argument. We just got...for the first time...playable red systems which now allow us to have some serious and fun H2H and cooperative play from a different tactical perspective. This is a beginning...a fantastic beginning and I'm sure that more red vehicles will be coming our way sometime in the future. For now let's enjoy and learn about how we can employ what we have against those western machines and tactics. There's a lot of fun in that.

[TankHunter]

Sky

BMP-1 and 2 are going to be seen in most missions if they are made available. The BMP was used in the Yom Kippur War, the Iran-Iraq War, Gulf Wars 1 and 2. The BMP-1 were used in the recent Libyan Civil War along with many other conventional and un-conventional wars. While more advanced and modern vehicles would be nice, the older ones are probably easier to gain access to and have seen much more action.

[Sky Hunter]

Simply now BMP-1 is defenseless with its archaic adaptation of SPG-9 c*** and AT-3 missile not mention about its ridiculous "FCS" and paper armor. BMP-2 is now barely adequate but I don't think its ATGMs can destroy any modern Wester tank frontally but maybe you think about firing them at Western IFVs as an act of desperation. Note what Western IFV you have in SBPro: CV90, Pizarro, Bradley - the best in its class. Russian IFVs are no match for them so such IFV duels won't be interesting at all. Yes, in-game Soviet APCs like BTR, BRDM can fight with, say, M113A3 etc. but that is another story - here we are some game balance.

As for T-80U I don't think it differs much in combat potential from T-90 except its latest model - T-90MS. Anyway in our case both are sentenced to quick and miserable death in short advent of M829A4 round and L/55 gun combo (Capable of piercing through 1 meter of RHAe plate from 2 km range? I suppose so! Are they completely immune to all types of ERA? I also suppose so!). Yes, addition of Type-99 tank would be very appreciated but I don't think eSim Team can get its detailed description anytime soon.

I consider M1A2SEP as an equivalent of Leo-2A6. Note there are all types of Leo-2 in SBPro but only older Abrams versions.

[enigma6584]

Russian IFVs are no match for them so such IFV duels won't be interesting at all. Yes, in-game Soviet APCs like BTR, BRDM can fight with, say, M113A3 etc. but that is another story - here we are some game balance.

As for T-80U I don't think it differs much in combat potential from T-90 except its latest model - T-90MS. Anyway in our case both are sentenced to death in advent of M829A4 round and L/55 combo.

Much will depend on the scenario design. If you are going to create a simple mission with the above referenced IFVs standing across from each other over an open desert...then yes the Russian equipment will suffer. The scenario designer must level it out by either giving OPFOR players the numbers, terrain features they can attack or defend appropriately from or both. Then I think you will see H2H games on a more even basis.

[Sky Hunter]

I think today's reality creates very unbalanced scenarios here. Yes, you can create scenario with some unique conditions where Soviet stuff can achieve something but frankly speaking there is not only a matter of qualitative balance. Also crew training, command and control, quantitative aspects are very unbalanced in today's East-West scenarios. Besides I think now air power dominates land combat as never before...overall not strange at all if we have one Western superpower and no Eastern superpower nowadays.

[TankHunter]

The thing is that you are not likely to create a mission based on "today's realities." Even if you do you will likely make it with those realities, but give the side with Soviet equipment a best case situation. I.E., prepared defenses, city fighting, etc and an obtainable objective, such as cause enough casualties to make the news for an Iraq War themed mission.

Lets look at the Iran Iraq war, the BMP-1 and particularly the BMP-2 in Iraqi service were fairly nasty problems for the Iranians. Especially considering what Iran had available. In which case the BMP-2 would be a tough vehicle to deal with. The same is true for the BMP-1 in the Yom Kippur War (if they didn't have maintenance problems). Then there are the various counter insurgencies that these vehicles have been involved in. For these you need no special situation for one to be successful with a BMP.

So the best missions for using these vehicles in are likely going to be an Iran-Iraq War or an Egyptian-Libyan war themed mission, as opposed to NATO vs Warsaw Pact or a Gulf War mission. Think 70s, not 90s or 00s.

[Marko]

The BMP may not be the newest or best IFV around but if used properly can be useful.

The 76mm gun and sagger missile are more then a match for the M-113 APC and can be Useful against infantry.bunkers and can damage tanks if placed in a reverse slop defence

it has got a glass jaw.but it is fast and Amphibious the design is over forty years old.when first introduced it was better then anything the west had till the marder came along.so lets give the old girl some respect.as for the BMP-2.again the 30mm gun dos not have much punch compared to its western counter parts.but one of the things i like to do is play around with all the different ammo types for all the vehicles currently modelled in the Sim

and the difference can be quite staggering in terms of a vehicles capabilities try using a T-72 with the latest BM42m rounds.compared with a BM15 round.my point is this if the Russians had or have.? developed better ammo for the BMP-2.it would give a lot of more modern IFV.s a run for there money. also in the real world there are a lot of weapon and Armour updates for both BMP-1/2.something not currently represented in SB.something i hope will change in the future.given a choice i would pick a playable BMP-1/2.rather then The never BMP-3.

[LtGeorge]

I'm working on a scenario about the battle between Iraqi forces and USMC recon to the east of Al Khafji in Desert Storm. I'll post it when it's ready - just had a first full debugging run today.

The scenario is at night in a winter storm, so visibility is very low. The LAV could see BMP1s using their TIS well before the BMPs could spot the LAV. The LAV would have to pepper the BMP1 with 25mm fire - even at 500m, it took a lot of rounds to bring the BMP1 down.

On the other hand, once the BMP1 got sight of the LAV, one PG9 hit was what it took.

Point being - the BMP1 may be old but it depends on your situation. Even in the T-72M1, you have to treat it with respect, and that goes for the BMP2 as well.

[Mogwa]

Data from SBwiki:

AT-4A (1973) 480 mm penetration

AT-4B (1980) 460 mm penetration

AT-4C (1991) 500 mm penetration

AT-5A (1977) 650 mm penetration

AT-5B (1990) 780 mm penetration

So lets look at some age appropriate MBTs, shall we?

The M1 is hardly invulnerable to the pitiful BMP-2...

What about the mighty Leo 2a4?

How about the Leo-1?

Notice the little blurb at the bottom of the Leo-1 image? Most shots I take at someone in SB are not from 90 degrees to the front.

Of course the BMP series arent the greatest APCs ever built but they are good enough and when given Soviet era numbers and tactics they can hurt you. It seems to me that the BMP-2 would do just fine in NATO/WP scenario through the early nineties. Middle east based missions just put it into combat with slightly less capable vehicles, horribly maintained, and both sides vehicles are crewed by some of the most ineffective crewman armored warfare has seen yet. A more modern conflict would probably see the BMP-2 with an updated ATGM. Ive read that it can be ungraded with everything from Milan-1, 2, and 3 to AT-14 Spriggan.

Any vehicle that can be played in SB with a human gunner can be dangerous. Im not a soviet-a-phile but I have probably killed every vehicle in the sim with a T-72M1 which some folks may think isnt a match for much newer MBTs. Different vehicles need different tactics.

As wegawds adding all these vehicles. Im pretty certain that the beta team has mentioned trying to get every tank from WW I to now added at some point. Im just happy with whatever gets added and I know that they are doing as much as they can to make each update contain the most new stuff that it can.

Mog

[Zipuli]

Having seen BMP-2 platoon of 4 vehicles concentrating a long fast HE burst in a single target, I can say I wouldn't like to be in the area. The russian 30mm autocannon is FAST and reliable and all the rounds are ready to use. So respect the old goat... Well used and with good support from tanks, it's still a potent vehicle. Just remember not to take her out when it's dark

[Skybird03]

Since we are at christmas 2012 wishes - I would like to see a playable Marder. And I ask if there are vplans for the new German IFV, the Puma. Beyond that, a playable M1A2SEP indeed would be appreciated.

I would favour these three over any newly implemented vehicles.

The sim allows nice national MBT-IFV couples now: M1+M2, Strv122+CV90, Leo2A6E+Pizarro, so give us a German IFV and a British IFV as well!

[Sky Hunter]

- Using BMP-1/2 in 1970s scenarios is OK but it has nothing common with majority of Western tanks and IFVs present in SBPro. Iranians cound not even dream about today's Western equipment fighting Iraqis. During Gulf War Bradley outclassed BMP-1.

- Nope . Now BMP-1 gun is not any threat to any up-to-date armored vehicle possessing autocannon. Its gun has practical range less than 500 meters with pitiful accuracy. Even M113 or any other platform armed with 0.5HMG can hit BMP-1 from longer ranges and destroy it from sides. Read a bit about BMP-1 service during Soviet intervention in Afghanistan.

- Looking at those armor thickness I am still confident BMP-2 anti-tank missiles cannot penetrate frontal armor of M1A1HA and Leo-2A4/A5/A6 tanks. Only old Leo-1 is vulnerable. Take into account resistance against HEAT rounds, not KE ones and probability of hitting specific frontal areas ot these tanks. Tank armor designers are very clever guys!

[Marko]

There has been a long time debate about the effectiveness of IFV,s and some experts say They are a waste of money and more dangerous for the crews and the squad it Carry's.

look at the best trained armoured force in the world the IDF.they still use M-113.and have not developed a IFV.and the end of the day they are just a battlefield taxi.even the most Advanced western IFV,s primary role is to delivery its squad and provide some fire support if possible.the one thing i have Noticed is the American and Russian IFV,s have a bid advantage.with there missile carrying capacity's.i have set up many scenario where the Bradley is taking on the CV-90C and all the Other IFV,s currently modelled. the Bradley normally comes out on top using its tow launcher.

i will take on any tank with the brad tow launcher but i tend to withdraw with the other Types of IFV if possible.

[Skybird03]

I could imagine that terrain and geography have something to do with the CV's armament. When the playground you find them most

- Sweden - is covered over and over with trees and forest, TOW I assume to be less often in a position to have a clear flgith path then

in let'S say Germany, or the open desert. In terrain like Sweden, I would favour a big sized gun like the Bofors 40mm over TOWs, even

more when imagining - I may be wrong - that the terrain often is not allowing heavy tanks and thgus the major mechnaised enemy to

be met is anjother IFV. And a 40mm travels to a BMP or a Bradley much faster than a TOW reaches a CV. And if you want to go with

TOWs after a force of MBTS, then maybe something like the small, agile Wiesel or the flat, low Jaguar is the better solution over a huge

, high Bradley, too - to give that MBT's big boomstick a harder time to aim at something, becasue defeating that big Boom by armour is

making little difference for either a Wiesel or a Bradley or a Jaguar - smaller is more beautiful here.

[rump]

look at the best trained armoured force in the world the IDF.they still use M-113.and have not developed a IFV.

That's at the least debatable: IDF Namer

- Rump

[Sky Hunter]

Notice IDF also use very specific heavy APCs from a long time like Nagmachon, Nakpadon, Puma, Azcharit and Namer. So they in fact are very careful about troop protection.

I think you messed two separate designs: APC and IFV. APC is essentially a battlefield taxi i.e. it should not engage in combat. Yet IFV are designed to take part in combat supporting dismounted infantry, destroying tanks and other armored vehicles, enemy defense points etc. I cannot see IFV decline now - for instance Bundeswehr will introduce very advanced Puma IFV in the near future.

[Froggy]

That's at the least debatable: IDF Namer

- Rump

Namer, Achzarit, and every others conversion based on Centurion Hull are APC, not IFV.

[rump]

Namer, Achzarit, and every others conversion based on Centurion Hull are APC, not IFV.

Agree, it's more an APC than IFV but what if they add the Spike missile system?

From http://www.military-today.com/apc/namer.htm (emphasis mine):

The IDF considers developing support variants of the Namer, such as command vehicle, armored recovery vehicle, technical support vehicle, ambulance, and infantry fighting vehicle, armed with 30-mm cannon and anti-tank guided missiles.

- Rump

[Companion]

Talking of future PC additions to SB, I'm hoping for older western IFVs of cold war vintage, such as M2A1 brads or Marder 1A1s. (even noncrewables would make me so happy)

Though BMPs are still dangerous foe, (I've even seen BMP-1s separating Leopard turret from hull with well placed Grom gun flank shots)

As mentioned, currently BMPs are facing western counterparts more advanced than their Cold War contemporaries and the lack of advanced ammunitions to balance it out means any Cold War themed mech. inf. battles are quite heavily biased towards blue favor.

Oh, and the old warhorse YPR could use some love; it's still trapped in its SB1 glory.

Edit: as an afterthought, adding BMP-3 means I can make a Korean war themed mission with 'exotic' SK kits (T-80U and BMP-3) :drool:

[marky657]

The missle on the BMP-2 has been responsible for my demise more than once while playing in the instant action mode. I do believe I heard the sound 30MM fire striking my hull as well. I still think the BMP-2 and 3 series of vehicles while lacking, is still capable of making a mess of your day.

Maybe like "Death by thousand cuts".....

[MAJ_Fubar]

Yeah, the YPR definitely needs some love, particularly since the South Koreans use several variants of this design. A non-playable vehicle I'd like to see before the BMP-3 and others would be the PT-76, especially appropriate given recent international developments.