what weapon do you think would be more usefull on an ACP?...?
a single 2A72 or a single 2A70? since the BMP-3 has both and has to store the ammo for both guns, however if one of them was removed and the turret redesigned you could store far more ammo for one gun or the other, while having both guns is nice im sure having 60+ 100mm rounds would be alot better in my opinion to having 22 100mm rounds + a bunch of 30mm's. any thoughts on the idea of having a vehicles with only a 100mm or simply removing it for extra ammo would be appreciated.
Rob- i just don't think having ALL of those weapons is in any way beneficial, i would rather have just the 30mm with 700+ rounds and externally mounted Kornet missiles OR have the 100mm with 60+ rounds and the A-10 Stabber for anti tank. it's great to have a weapon for all occasions but i just think they went a bit overboard on arming this thing.
BTW just a thought but do you think a 100mm HESH round would have a good chance of screwing up/destroying the optics of an IFV? i mean if a solid hit from that can render it's weapons useless then you don't really need to penetrate the armour, just blind it by killing optics and move in for a close range HEAT round finisher.
- 8 years agoFavorite Answer
I'm not really sure why you would want to change the design of the BMP-3 - for what it was designed to do, it works. It has a 100mm auto-loading main gun with 22 HE rounds in the magazine. 8 additional guided missiles are carried for the main gun that are loaded manually and can defeat reactive armor.
Add in 500 rounds of ammunition for a 30mm cannon and 2000 rounds for a 7.62 MG (+4000 rounds in reserve) and you're loaded for bear, especially considering that you have 7 dismounts in the troop compartment that all have firing portals on the sides and rear of the vehicle.
Lastly, the weapons systems on the BMP-3 all adjust automatically for elevation and trajectory ...so the complete weapon system is extremely accurate? Why mess with it?