What's new

Iranian Ground Forces | News and Equipment

They've done a really good job upgrading both vehicles. I like the camo job on both. The remote turret is also commendable. I want to see these remote turrets on all the BMP units Iran has. Iran definitely needs a modernized version of the BMP that they can mass produce. I would like to see some of them with a 50 mm cannon like this Russian beast. Imagine a few of those along with some terminator armored vehicles and a few T-90's or Armata tanks. They would tear the battlefield to pieces, especially with good air support. I would love to see Iran build it's own version of the terminator and even arm some armored vehicles with Gatling guns with armor piercing rounds perhaps.

Russian armored vehicle with 50 MM autocannon


Iran Asefeh 23 mm Gatling gun


Iran Muharram 50 mm Gatling gun

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Usb_hck2Tk&lc=UgjqMUpr_UkJX3gCoAEC


 
BMP-2 just add mobility and firepower to the squad, not protection. bunch of ISIS fighters with a DSHK can kill everyone inside it from 100 meters. Russians were the first ones to feel this fact. during Chechen war BMPs were getting destroyed so easily that forced the Russians to change T-55 to APCs:
af4530944079bcbdb4d54e456482b494.jpg
 
BMP-2 just add mobility and firepower to the squad, not protection. bunch of ISIS fighters with a DSHK can kill everyone inside it from 100 meters. Russians were the first ones to feel this fact. during Chechen war BMPs were getting destroyed so easily that forced the Russians to change T-55 to APCs:
af4530944079bcbdb4d54e456482b494.jpg

That is due to Soviet Union doctrine that placed quantity over quality. Syrian army was also trained under that doctrine hence why they suffered so many losses in early years of war.

Furthermore, you start changing a BMP to a Tank then why call it a BMP any more. There is a reason BMPs exist. As US showed with Bradley fighting vehicle in PG war I and II, it can do many responsibility of a tank including taking out other tanks as long as it is used properly.

Now that same vehicle is used improperly in Yemen by Saudi Arabia and we have seen the results. BMPs should never be alone nor lead a frontal assault. Also they should avoid wide open terrain without close air support flying above.
 
That is due to Soviet Union doctrine that placed quantity over quality. Syrian army was also trained under that doctrine hence why they suffered so many losses in early years of war.

Furthermore, you start changing a BMP to a Tank then why call it a BMP any more. There is a reason BMPs exist. As US showed with Bradley fighting vehicle in PG war I and II, it can do many responsibility of a tank including taking out other tanks as long as it is used properly.

Now that same vehicle is used improperly in Yemen by Saudi Arabia and we have seen the results. BMPs should never be alone nor lead a frontal assault. Also they should avoid wide open terrain without close air support flying above.
APCs exist to protect foot soldiers against light and intermediate size bullets and provide them cover in long ranges. an army without APC should travel in small ranges in long times, less protected and less armed and prepared against larger guns with more ranges. for capturing a position you should have soldiers on the ground to neutralize the threats and that soldier needs APC for above mentioned reasons. while any terrorist group uses ATGM, using BMP-2 which is vulnerable against even RPG-7 is not a good idea. if you use BMP-2, you should fill the shortcoming with another capable part of your armed forces.
 
Modern or modernized APCs can use reactive armor plates or even active protection systems (although rare) to increase protection. Of course you can never compare that level of protection to a tank in the same class. Still a well trained crew, especially if the vehicle is armed with a hunter killer system and thermal imaging, target detection software, should be able to take out a group of terrorists at close to medium range. Especially when you have lots of APCs all working in tandem, the sheer firepower can be devastating. Add a few tanks to the mix and air support and you're good to go.

APCs exist to protect foot soldiers against light and intermediate size bullets and provide them cover in long ranges. an army without APC should travel in small ranges in long times, less protected and less armed and prepared against larger guns with more ranges. for capturing a position you should have soldiers on the ground to neutralize the threats and that soldier needs APC for above mentioned reasons. while any terrorist group uses ATGM, using BMP-2 which is vulnerable against even RPG-7 is not a good idea. if you use BMP-2, you should fill the shortcoming with another capable part of your armed forces.
 
Heres a good pic of the [unloaded] twin launchers for the helo launched version of the delahvieh
Ecs1VcPXgAEME_9

Looks like its got exhaust extensions fitted at the rear of the launchers to channel the exhaust.

Looks identical to TOW/Toophan missile launchers. What makes you believe this is for delahvieh missiles?
 
Looks identical to TOW/Toophan missile launchers. What makes you believe this is for delahvieh missiles?
Yeah,I think you`re right it is just a tow launcher.
Perry_109.jpg


2758350_1000.jpg

6798728_original.jpg

D4mIdz_W0AAbfp6

The prototype delahvieh launcher is pretty clearly an adaption of the preexisting tow launcher with the front extensions cut right back and the rear exhaust pipe type extensions removed completely.
 
EdTOoDNWoAAAXDX

Remote operated turrets under construction.

***UPDATE***

This looks to be new Karrars under construction
EdUJviQVcAAavMZ

EdUJvicU0AAR3Hf

EdUJvjVU0AELZiZ

EdUJvi7UEAAK8Em

BMP ifv remote operated turrets under construction

The third picture,what kind of rocket launcher is that?Looks a bit like Russian RPG 26,what caliber etc...?
This is an iranian designed and manufactured qareh 80mm rocket launcher.
 
Back
Top Bottom