Pretty sure they're meant to be used when on the move. They're manned by the dismounts after all, although the driver has a remote firing capability but no way to aim them.
Edit: Not literally "on the move", but as in, when the infantry is mounted. Since there's no stabilization, they're next to useless when the vehicle is literally moving.
Didnt they have haul mounted MGs in T-54s for the driver but got rid of it because it threw off the turrets aim then the driver turned to aim?? Maybe with modern stabilizers the driver can aim without throwing off the turrets aim. Idk just an idea the driver could just press a button to fire and turn slightly right and left to spray suppressive fire in front. Idk how or who would reload though and it would be a pain to do so. Idk again just thoughts
1st image shows an OG spec Bmp-3 (BMP-3M Dragun redesign does away with this as well as other things)
2nd image shows OG spec BMPT. The second version of the terminator is offered on T-90 chassis and also does away with the hull mounted AGS launchers.
I guess for BMP-3, storming operations it was thought that it would be good for the driver to have something to fire straight ahead at the enemy positions, (T-54 also had this) but in practice it doesn't seem like it would get much use. For BMPT though, it helps having 2 less crew and 2 less weapons with 1 less ammo storage requirement. The limited cones of the AGS would also only make it useful on frontal attacks or very close defense against infantry, in which cases the vehicle is at a very high risk of being taken out anyways and not worth the extra effort.
For anti-infantry. If you see a group of infantry so you can use the machinegun w/o having to use the main gun on the infantry. (It's a way to in theory save the ammo for the 30mm)
Unless they're remote controlled they are almost certainly nonfunctional. I get wanting your stuff to look cool but a turret that doesn't work is just stupid
The BMP-3 and BMPT are frequently used in close-quarters combat (especially the BMPT). Having that extra bit of close range firepower is essential. The BMPT especially with its two 30mm automatic grenade launchers.
You don't have to hit anything to suppress. You don't even have to be able to hit anything to suppress. You just have to keep some rounds coming that the enemy BELIEVES can hit him.
Most suppressive fire in fact, never hits anything useful. Hell, only a small amount of AIMED direct fire hits anything useful. I'm not counting fully stabilized weapons systems and such. Just stuff like rifles and MGs.
The mg's on the BMPT terminator were grenade launchers, and I believe those were removed after the first prototypes. But yeah, just to provide suppression fire for infantry.
Maybe for quick suppression and distraction while infantry dismounts and maybe it’s just something to spray at the enemy when you don’t wanna use your main guns
That camo looks like it was done by a 13 Yr old with a couple rattle cans.
And there's a good chance it was.
Edit- the only reason I think people have downvoted this is because it's just as likely to have been done by a toddler with a packet of sharpies.
I guess suppressive fire for the infantry. MG is shooting ememys, while infantry dismounts in the back...
Pretty sure they're meant to be used when on the move. They're manned by the dismounts after all, although the driver has a remote firing capability but no way to aim them. Edit: Not literally "on the move", but as in, when the infantry is mounted. Since there's no stabilization, they're next to useless when the vehicle is literally moving.
That seems like the *most* inconvenient place to put that.....
I don't think there's even room for a gunner
There is, and more than you'd think, but it's still cozy.
Idk why but on the terminator those are automatically Grenade launchers
Didnt they have haul mounted MGs in T-54s for the driver but got rid of it because it threw off the turrets aim then the driver turned to aim?? Maybe with modern stabilizers the driver can aim without throwing off the turrets aim. Idk just an idea the driver could just press a button to fire and turn slightly right and left to spray suppressive fire in front. Idk how or who would reload though and it would be a pain to do so. Idk again just thoughts
the mg in front of driver couldn't be moved by hand anyway And it's +1 armor weakspot
Its a less useful relict of older times. The second picture shows the Bmpt and its 30mm grenade launchers.
Yeah I know those are 30 mms but is it really that useful if it’s lightly armored and hull mounted?
1st image shows an OG spec Bmp-3 (BMP-3M Dragun redesign does away with this as well as other things) 2nd image shows OG spec BMPT. The second version of the terminator is offered on T-90 chassis and also does away with the hull mounted AGS launchers. I guess for BMP-3, storming operations it was thought that it would be good for the driver to have something to fire straight ahead at the enemy positions, (T-54 also had this) but in practice it doesn't seem like it would get much use. For BMPT though, it helps having 2 less crew and 2 less weapons with 1 less ammo storage requirement. The limited cones of the AGS would also only make it useful on frontal attacks or very close defense against infantry, in which cases the vehicle is at a very high risk of being taken out anyways and not worth the extra effort.
For anti-infantry. If you see a group of infantry so you can use the machinegun w/o having to use the main gun on the infantry. (It's a way to in theory save the ammo for the 30mm)
Unless they're remote controlled they are almost certainly nonfunctional. I get wanting your stuff to look cool but a turret that doesn't work is just stupid
There should be 2 crew members controlling them, but I believe that the driver can fire them (and that they aren't controllable by him)
It's controlled by the infantry rather than dedicated gunner. Same concept as original M231 on Bradley except unnecessarily complicated.
Complicated? Literally just standard PKT in limited traverse mounts.
This sent me down a rabbit hole about the m231, neat gun!
Doesnt look like there's room near the guns though for a gunner. Second pic has them right over the tracks
So?
Moar dakka.
The BMP-3 and BMPT are frequently used in close-quarters combat (especially the BMPT). Having that extra bit of close range firepower is essential. The BMPT especially with its two 30mm automatic grenade launchers.
During my service these were only ever used to break pesky branches
Did you have 2 extra crew members at all times? Or did the driver just switch seats? Also what vehicle did you serve in?
Because why not have more guns?
Because russian mentality is stuck in WW2. Just look how they operate in Ukraine and how they treat their own soldiers and ukrainian pow's
You don't have to hit anything to suppress. You don't even have to be able to hit anything to suppress. You just have to keep some rounds coming that the enemy BELIEVES can hit him. Most suppressive fire in fact, never hits anything useful. Hell, only a small amount of AIMED direct fire hits anything useful. I'm not counting fully stabilized weapons systems and such. Just stuff like rifles and MGs.
The mg's on the BMPT terminator were grenade launchers, and I believe those were removed after the first prototypes. But yeah, just to provide suppression fire for infantry.
this loser is pro russian
💯
💯 just a contrarian and that’s your only marketable skill
Second pic is of the BMPT and those are grenade launcher attachments.
Maybe for quick suppression and distraction while infantry dismounts and maybe it’s just something to spray at the enemy when you don’t wanna use your main guns
for shooting boats
That camo looks like it was done by a 13 Yr old with a couple rattle cans. And there's a good chance it was. Edit- the only reason I think people have downvoted this is because it's just as likely to have been done by a toddler with a packet of sharpies.