What Happened to Russia's BMP-Terminator in Ukraine? 

Play Enlisted for FREE on PC, Xbox Series X|S and PS5: playen.link/taskandpurpose Follow the link to download the game and get your exclusive bonus now. See you in battle!

In Afghanistan, the Soviets started using ZSU-23/4 to protect its convoys in mountainous regions. Now, ZSU is an anti-aircraft gun, but it also means it can elevate its guns very high and hit targets other vehicles couldn't. And it does have 4x23mm guns, so the volume of fire is outstanding. However, it was not well armored (had only a steel plate, 10mm thick). Thus the idea for a vehicle like this... Auto cannons with high elevation, but also some armor... Now, they have too few of them and since those vehicles aren't your standard kind of vehicles, there is a massive confusion about how to use them. Seems like they are learning the hard way... Again...

The Terminator is NOT comparable to 2 anti tank soldiers, let alone 2 bmp's and a rifle platoon. The reason infantry are dangerous are that they can attack from many different positions at the same time. A Terminator is like Rambo standing alone. A Terminator is like a rifle platoon standing together in one spot. It gives enemy a single large target rather than many small ones.

this is a fire support vehicle for fighting in suburbs and quarters with medium buildings, in Mariupol it was very lacking for clearing neighborhoods, BTR-82 operated instead, the terminator is an excellent vehicle for fire support of mobile company tactical groups

I watched the interview of the chief constructor of the BMPT. In short, what he said can be summed up as: "We took the specifications of the Ministry of Defence and made the exact opposite." The Army requested a highly protected vehicle that can support tanks during the attack and in urban warfare, but the engineers thought it would be better to give it "a long hand and a sharp sight", because Heinz Guderian wrote that a tank should engage the attacking enemy from an ambush (true for the Wehrmacht in 1944 but irrelevant for what the Russian Army actually wanted). So they installed for instance the 2A42 30-mm cannons instead of the lighter and more modern 2A72 version, because the 2A42 is more accurate and can thus fire at longer ranges. Then they added the Ataka-ATGMs which were completely unprotected because the vehicle was not intended for use in combat at close range, and also some very cool but expensive sights for this stuff. Early versions came with the 40-mm AGS-17 grenade launchers but they were removed, because the engineers decided that the vehicle should operate at long ranges. As the chief constructor puts it himself: "They wanted a sledgehammer - we built them a microscope." And he was really proud saying it. Except for the part that the military clearly ordered a heavy armored sledgehammer, not some high tech long range sniper wunderwaffe. Maybe that is why this vehicle which was first shown in 2000 has not been accepted into the Army for so long and is in service only in very small numbers now. Not only they don't have the tactics to use it - it's not what they wanted in the first place!

I will say that they've made a fairly threatening looking vehicle there. The rockets give it a bit of a Robocop ED-209 vibe.

“The whole Genisys of the terminator program” - I see what you did there Cappy 😂

Yeah, well.. about that.. you see, there are some new wild footages..

Its doing quite well now

Omg, I think it’s the first time Chris pronounced a name of a Ukrainian city correctly! 😂

Take a look at the Canadian Skink from 1943. It was originally designed as an anti-aircraft armored vehicle (20 mm quad mount in an armored speedy turret) but the Luftwaffe became much less of a menace in the last year of the war so the Skink was obsolete before it was put into mass production. But they sent the three prototypes to Europe anyway and they found out that the Skink was great for very quickly "cleaning" German infantry positions entrenched in villages and towns. There's a great article on it in Wikipedia.

Love the Mammoth tank reference! My all time favorite tank in my favorite Command and Conquer game.

IMO this is a pretty neat-sounding concept if they could manufacture IFVs to have these kinds of turrets. I remember reading that the Russians resorted to using Shilkas (armoured AA) during the battles in Grozny, due to their ability to elevate their guns to very steep angles.

It's not BMP "Terminator", it's BMPT "Terminator". BMP stands for "Combat Vehicle for Infantry" (Infantry Fighting Vehicle), while BMPT stands for "Combat Vehice for Supporting Tanks", so T in the name is for Tanks, not "Terminator", which is a nickname.

No man, you are not the only man who remember Mammoth tanks :D keep it coming, we love your stuff in Slovakia, do some video for Slovakia as you did for Latvia, Lithuania and Scandinavians pls :)

There were two recent videos of terminators one comming in and supporting infantry positions and another of it assaulting a part of a city. The firepower they can laydown is impressive.

As we speak the Russians are using it in luhansk region making good advances ,and the terminator showed good capability in Forrest area's, I saw many videos of it in action

Very informative. I always thought "gun elevation and depression" was a measure of how happy or sad you were based on how many modular muskets you own.

"Sergey, Remember how we have issues coordinating movement, maneuvering and support between our poorly trained armored and infantry units? Yes Igor, should we just correct our doctrine to suit the training levels and capabilities of our units and adhere to proven principles? No Sergy, We need to adopt an over complicated vehicle we don't have doctrine, training, or support for and use that to make up for our shortcomings. My Uncle is a board member at Uralvagonzavod so we will be guaranteed a job when we release. SOLD!!!

I’ve seen a few vids of the terminators in kremenaya. Their role from what I could discern is sort of a level 2 support for destroying dug in troop fortifications. Based off what I seen they can in theory engage 3 targets at once but so far the max I have witnessed is 2. Aka the main cannons were ripping at one target while one of the grenadiers was suppressing a fox hole. I haven’t seen it in urban combat yet but it does very well at suppressing the enemy in rural combat. I think once the staff figures out how to best use the thing then it can be a beast. As mentioned earlier it currently seems to be used as a “level 2” support unit now. Meaning if the bmp’s(being what I call level 1 support) have trouble with enemy fortifications they will then ‘call in’ or “summon” a group of 1-2 terminators which also seems to be accompanied by 2-4 MBT’s on average. Afterwards they form a killing box with the MBT’s on the flanks and the terminator in the middle with 1-2 drones overhead doing spotting and surveillance. The terminators then lay in overwhelming firepower generally in a straight line of fire while the MBT’s lay in firepower from an angle. It’s very effective. I’m not sure Chris’s numbers are correct and/or the build strategy may have been changed. Based off the info I seen now that none of the terminators are ‘new’. They instead fit the terminator turret onto existing t-72 hulls as part of a modernization program. Chris’s numbers seem to reflect more of the hull being freshly produced instead of being re-used. I’ve also seen vids of troop feedback stating that the optics are very good on the terminators granting them very good visibility/situational awareness. Lastly, all logical data aside it looks like one sexy death machine tho.

There's footage of this thing cutting down a forest like it's mowing down grass. Some Ukrainians at the end of fire I suppose.

It would probably kick ass with an American doctrine of fighting and tactics. I’ve seen so many videos of Russian armor brigades not looking like a team at all.

From what you mentioned, about the rate of fire, this vehicle would use up all of it's rounds very quickly.

03:34 Need to mention that all Soviet tanks factories was named as "tractor factories" (in Stalingrad, Kharkov, Chelyabinsk etc) 05:35 you probably don't know, but three-headed dragon is a traditional Russian folklore character:)

I've learned more from these videos then I ever did from any pre-op brief or post-op debrief....

Honestly I'm glad we covered the important stuff. I was getting worried about these things going after Sarah Connor. The Terminator franchise can only take so much.

The editing just gets better and better. Love it. Cheers!

Thanks for this video, man!

I'm just an armchair strategist, with an old engineer's interest in the technology. But I saw a video of one of them firing, and one issue became immediately clear. The design has two 30mm autocannons close to each other, and both with muzzle breaks. Every shot produces a lot of gasses directed to the sides... and at the other gun. Both barrels were shaking like mad from this interference. Who needs accuracy when you have mo' daka, right?

If you look at the vehicles caught on video in Ukraine, you will notice the dual grenade launchers on each side. This feature was removed from the production version of the vehicle. Or in other words, the ones in Ukraine are prototypes, sent there to do field trials or testing and maybe get some propaganda or export advertisement material. Any effects they'd have on the battlefield will not be released to the public any time soon, or ever. Such results will be used to modify the final design and decide on whether this item is worth producing at all. Their reports make me believe they are doing something similar with the Su57 fighter jets, but those are actual serially produced units and the project is much more important and further along.

Chris, you’re a above average military historian.

4:00 oh man, you.d better prepare and learn the history. Not only the Ukrainian SSR suffered those years, the whole South of the Soviet Union was hit by golodomor, russian territories too. So it is not "Ukrainian golodomor", it was nationwide one

This was very enlightening and a great explanation!

The bmp t does not actually adress the purpose of infantry support, which is the enhanced awareness. The firepower aspect was never what necessitated the need for infantry support. This vehicle can not conceal itself, it can't scatter, can't spread out, can't fortify etc. Totally flawed concept

It’s easy to see that this thing would be a very high priority target. To be effective, it would have to be used in numbers, so that the units can support one another.

Those Terminator turrets look very vulnerable. Like, any hit up there could disable those guns, and then it's just a moderately-armoured box wandering around and feeling sorry for itself. Oh, hey, our host said that too. Heh.

+100 points for the Mammoth tank reference

I think if they were tacked on to brigades of mechanized infantry as support vehicles they may be effective. As part of a tank formation, probably not so much

A fast moving turret with some 20/30mm guns that can elevate high enough to fire at high elevation targets but was still armored enough to take large caliber rounds. Give it a few TOW missiles for anti-armor defence and a decent engine so it can scamper away from bigger threats if needed. Sounds an awful lot like a Bradley or a Striker but without troop transport capabilities.

I think that the BMPT is a promising machine, but not as it is being used now. it will not be able to replace infantry and the best solution to this problem should be a new tactic of combat. it is not necessary to count on the fact that it will be able to replace the infantry completely, on the contrary, it should be used together with tanks and infantry covering them. and thus it will not replace the infantry, but will become its excellent complement in battle, especially if it is good to establish the simultaneous work of all elements.

Just found this channel and the content is excellent. But I cant figure out if the videos or the comments are better lol

Great to see someone follow-up on these Russian “threats”. IIRC, These tanks were designed by committee, so they got overloaded with features that made them harder to use. Fwiw, The American military has a similar problem, with the infantryman having to carry heavier and heavier loads because higher-ups keep wanting to add more “features” to their kit. Thanks for the video!

Hey Cappy I love your videos. Your analysis and extremely thorough explanations are a welcome treat for an "Average Marine Infantryman" like me. I have to give you huge thanks and respect for giving a shout out to Command and Conquer Red Alert. I too am a gigantic nerd 🤓 and I am grateful that you gave acknowledgement to this legendary series of RTS games. Thanks for all of your amazing content. Keep up the great work soldier.

When I served at Lakenheath; a buddy and I did a fiesta interior and steering system swap into his mini. They are cool cars. The donor was used to its full extent.

It seems more likely that the few Terminators in existence were sent to the front for a short period of time as some sort of combat test/evaluation. It would make sense for them to be withdrawn quickly before one could be destroyed and the images posted all over social media

Really enjoy your non bias reporting Chris. It’s honestly priceless.

I really dig your video, the grunt (or groan) humour sold me. As an average aviator, I appreciate the common dog approach your content provides.

While I have no doubt that the vehicle is great at clearing out infantry from an urban area, just like similar vehicles were used in WW2 by pretty much all the various forces, I feel the Russians still kind of missed why you really need the infantry support when you engage in urban warfare. The problem, to my admittedly relatively inexperienced mind, is visibility and target acquisition. Sure, you can smoke the third floor window, but you still can't watch them all, or keep an eye on all the doorways at the same time. And every side street, especially if that too has doorways. And behind you. The only place you probably don't have to watch for surprise anti tank rockets is right in front of you, and even that is a maybe.

Red Alert 2/Yuri's Revenge is the most under-rated RTS game of all time. Also, good video as always.

The Terminator got terminated.

I think the "Terminators can engage 3 targets at once" claim is easily explained: the turret engages a target while the two hull mounted AGLs engage the other targets independently.

Wow you got sponsored by Enlisted! Thats huge i still occasionally play it. Sniper squad main of course

I've seen one briefly in a video and it was putting in work.

800 rounds? It would be interesting to have a video about ammunition. I am always surprised by the low volume of ammo in system. I have obviously 0 knowledge :)

Man in Armoured Warfare these things are beastly. Was really wondering how they were doing here, glad to see this video on them.

There are thermal and night vision optics with display screen. The 30 mm cannons are highly accurate for 3000 mts. Very effective machine with at least 70 in the inventory

Your videos are great. I appreciate your sense of humor. Best regards.

At 13:53 it shows a Ukrainian BMPV-64 which is based on the T-64 it kind of had the same role as the BMP-T but different manufacturers and BMPV-64 never made it pass the prototype phase at least from my knowledge

I’m trying to imagine how much the gun tubes wobble from the muzzle brakes directing the gas at each other, while firing.

8:45 Most of the infantry that was killed in the big firefirghts of that battle of Grozny were killed in their armoured vehicles, for refusing to dismount. A majority of the soldiers that survived those fights did so just by exiting their vehicles to engage in the fights. It was common for them to take RPG fire from elevated positions, basement windows and moving teams in a 360 crossfire. That must have been hell on Earth, so I can understand how so many were compelled to stay in the vehicles, despite it meaning almost certain death. 😞 reports from both sides put them in Sieverodonetsk, during the battle, acting as medium range muscle to surpress and remove large groupings in buildings.

I think the Object 782 might've been the best. The 100mm main gun with a high angle of elevation would make it a good mortar tank/mobile light artillery vehicle, which is a great combination with the support role it was already meant to play.

The design still looks to have potential for urban combat and possibly mountainous terrain with those high elevation guns, it's just that like with so many other armored vehicles the situation awareness seems to let it down. If it could approach a battlefield environment while knowing where the threats would likely come from then it could be quite effective.

I love the equipment analysis of T&P. You are the kind of former soldier needed to write Field Manuals and Equipment Manuals. Any leader during a Company, Battalion, or Brigade can tell you soldiers always ask the “What About” question. Most of your T&P answers these questions. It should be in the Manuals as Notes that clear. As far as an Urban Combat vehicle, here is a lower cost, off the shelf, suggestion. Create an Infantry duel purpose air defenses/urban combat vehicle. Gut a Stryker. Add a crewless turret using a proven “Duster” AA gun. Add a 7.62 Vulcan machine gun on one side and 3 Stinger launcher on the other side. It would have a 3 man crew. It would train as a Brigade/Regiment, but be assigned by Division Command to individual Infantry Units when Urban Assaults are anticipated. At other times it would be an air defense supplemental weapon.

I feel like this could easily double as an anti-aircraft platform. Slap on a radar, include a tracking algorithm... You've got high explosive rounds and lots of ammo. Even add a few AA rockets. Make it an automated unmanned turret capable of tracking an object and setting a timer on the rounds for anti-air, and add an optional manual take over for urban combat focused on fighting infantry

when I see your analysis I think the ukrainian BTR4 is a similiar vehicle. The BTR4 has a very clever quick aiming sensor/display supported feature and a good overview of what goes on outside, but it is supposed to defend and lie in wait nad not attack due to its weak armor. The terminator is supposed to be an attack weapon, and thus it can be quickly destroyed by a single soldier. Probably the terminator would be a very good defense weapon if the displays and cameras were good and the aiming is quick, but it is an attack weapon by definition.

Tried that "Enlisted" game. Lots of fun. Convinced me I wouldn't want to be in the real thing. Yes, I was "killed" often but I also came back to life often. This has got to be a better experience than actual war. Even more respect for those that are in the real thing. Many don't come back. The horror.

3:21 the idea of the Terminator comes from the ZSU-23-4 which was used succesfully in chechnya against the AT gunners on the rooftops and the afganistan war on the mountains

There was parallel development of a version of this that could be retrofitted to existing T-72 hulls. The main point of that was to help foreign sales of T-90 tanks. Many potential customers had limited interest in T-90 because of their old T-72 inventories. This was seen as a potential way of getting sales by offering conversions of those T-72 stocks into various types of support vehicles such as BMP-T, engineering vehicles, and bridge layers. That would give customers a perceived cost effective option of recycling T-72s into something useful while buying new T-90s to replace them. They got some interest but most customers preferred to just upgrade their T-72s with new sensors and reactive armor bricks instead to get performance closer to T-90 on the cheap. It is telling that the Russian army themselves chose to do the same, upgrading T-72s instead of converting them and replacing them.

They have been terminated

Ive been playing Enlisted over a year now. It is excellent. Takes forever to rank up but its awesome

Love your sense of humour @Taskandpurpose 😅💯%

This didn’t age well

I don't think the terminator and t14 (both based on the same chassis) will have much of an impact because they are not on the battlefield in large numbers. I don't even know if they have even entered mass production yet

Object 787 would actually be resurrected in the Slovakian T-72M2 Moderna! The first two prototypes would mount a 20mm auto cannon on either side of the turret while still retaining the 125mm smoothbore cannon. While the third and fourth prototypes had only a single 30mm auto cannon mounted on the right side of the turret.

Awesome analysis

4:27 hahaha thanks bro, this channel gets me everytime. thanks made my day

You probably would want one second from front and one second from the back in an armoured column when moving through a city giving them the ability to respond quickly to rear frontal or side attacks but not relying them to snapfire at a tank suddenly appearing, you should also treat them as a support vehicle in open combat rather than in the frontline, have them guard the support vehicles until required for urban combat.

Seems like once again, Russia has prioritized 'does it looks good in a parade' over 'is it useful on the battlefield'.

Great overview.

These cannons wiggle so much when firing

No expert by any means but I'm thinking the Terminator would be more better used as personnel support in urban warfare. It would perform better than a tank and could reach those hard to get targets on high ground. Maybe they need to rethink the use of that vehicle rather than some sort of take support.

Like your C&C reference. However the BMPT looks more like an Apocalypse Tank from C&C RA2 than the mammoth tank. Especially that it can shoot missiles and dual cannons.

You guys hear the cope about the wobbly twin barrels on this thing? "It makes it more effective being inaccurate"

I love Cappys videos they include guns,history, and those are the only thing I need. 😂

to give stray fire is one thing but in best case one goes for accuracy and let the explosives stray. this is a spot for autocannon AA tanks like the tunguska or the german gepard. the latter is thought in a defensive ground role as well, though much of that depends on the aiming devices and ammo used. the west had a big emphasis on developing 3p ammo with proximity fuses, one just has to measure the distance and the round gets programmed when it leaves the barrel. tungsten balls will clear the trences from the top then. so what happened to the gepard would be the more intresting question.

Эта машина очень хорошо показала себя в боях.

you won my like with the C&C reference :P

Russia to use these properly would probably use them as a modification to the mechanized infantry battalion called an urban battalion. Replacing a company’s worth of BMPs with BMPTs. These units would be assigned to armored brigades in cities. Allowing for a balance between IFVs, Infantry and BMPTs to support tanks

The concept is good, but still not without infantry support. Also the tank needs to have separate spaced armour plating all over. Especially the roof. Also, active defense like Trophy needed. I just don't think they went far enough, thankfully.

It can definitely be a good vehicle on the battlefield, it's just that they need to understand and decide on a good tactic and role for it

apparently commanders were using at night where thanks to its night vision it was apparently successful, however they were always vulnerable to artillery fire (like every tank), and apparently the night ones was damaged/destroyed by artillery.

I have to wonder of a slightly up-armored 2K22 Tunguska would be almost as good at this job while also helping with AA and anti-drone work.

Also, I'd be shocked if these work as intended. They have a lot of firepower, yes. However, in urban combat they are still an enclosed armored vehicle, which means that they lack the situational awareness of dismounted infantry. As a grunt, the human senses gain so much situational awareness that a tanker just can't get in his tank. The sounds, lack of sounds, a human smell, a brief flash of movement, these are things that alert the infantryman/recon specialist to danger in the AO. So yes, this vehicle can put a lot of light/medium fires forward, but it doesn't solve the primary issue of the tank (situational awareness).

Wrong described BMPT2. BMPT2 consists only of 3 ppl(operators), not 5. BMPT1 not anymore in production line, only BMPT2.

The dual-mounted 30mm should have connected-muzzle-sleeves to eliminate muzzle blast from jolting the barrel too much. all modern armies should have Terminators in their inventory.

Timely video. I had only recently remembered these things and the hype surrounding their deployment and I was wondering what had happened to them.

What happened? It went on a special operation to get demilitarized.

How interesting to listen to the player's opinion on a real war=)

God, look at those barrels... Bouncing around with each shot.

Probably a date with Mr. HIMARS