This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
https://mezha.media/en/2022/06/16/polish-bmp-borsuk-which-should-replace-the-soviet-bmp-1/
"An interesting feature of the BMP is modular armor, which can be used depending on the purpose of the car. The lightest version of the BMP weighing 25 tons is amphibious, the heaviest armored almost like a light tank weighs as much as 40 tons."
Sources like military-today [1] also list "Weight (with add-on armor) ~ 40 t", although i think that 720 hp are not enough to power a 40 ton vehicle. FSbiran ( talk) 13:48, 23 April 2023 (UTC)
References
{{
cite web}}
: External link in |title=
(
help)
{{
cite web}}
: External link in |title=
(
help)
{{
cite web}}
: External link in |title=
(
help)
I saw someone add unit cost into the table based on the Defence24 article that estimated the value of the March 28 framework agreement at about 10 billion dollars [1], and I feel like I have to explain why that kind of estimates are very inaccurate with regards to not widely used and especially new vehicles (the more contracts there are for a vehicle, the more accurate such estimates are) and shouldn't really be made in that case (yes, I'll remove that cost estimate).
There is a couple of reasons why estimates like this are inaccurate, especially this particular one. All of them can be summarized by saying that this is a framework agreement, not a contract for an X amount of vehicles of one type. It means that the 10 billion dollars price includes not just the procurement of 1400 vehicles, but rather:
- setting up the production line (since it's the first contract, it has to be paid),
- procurement of around 1000 IFVs,
- development (these variants don't exist yet) and procurement of around 400 auxiliary vehicles in at least 5 different variants. Olekz17 ( talk) 14:49, 27 April 2023 (UTC)
References
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
https://mezha.media/en/2022/06/16/polish-bmp-borsuk-which-should-replace-the-soviet-bmp-1/
"An interesting feature of the BMP is modular armor, which can be used depending on the purpose of the car. The lightest version of the BMP weighing 25 tons is amphibious, the heaviest armored almost like a light tank weighs as much as 40 tons."
Sources like military-today [1] also list "Weight (with add-on armor) ~ 40 t", although i think that 720 hp are not enough to power a 40 ton vehicle. FSbiran ( talk) 13:48, 23 April 2023 (UTC)
References
{{
cite web}}
: External link in |title=
(
help)
{{
cite web}}
: External link in |title=
(
help)
{{
cite web}}
: External link in |title=
(
help)
I saw someone add unit cost into the table based on the Defence24 article that estimated the value of the March 28 framework agreement at about 10 billion dollars [1], and I feel like I have to explain why that kind of estimates are very inaccurate with regards to not widely used and especially new vehicles (the more contracts there are for a vehicle, the more accurate such estimates are) and shouldn't really be made in that case (yes, I'll remove that cost estimate).
There is a couple of reasons why estimates like this are inaccurate, especially this particular one. All of them can be summarized by saying that this is a framework agreement, not a contract for an X amount of vehicles of one type. It means that the 10 billion dollars price includes not just the procurement of 1400 vehicles, but rather:
- setting up the production line (since it's the first contract, it has to be paid),
- procurement of around 1000 IFVs,
- development (these variants don't exist yet) and procurement of around 400 auxiliary vehicles in at least 5 different variants. Olekz17 ( talk) 14:49, 27 April 2023 (UTC)
References