Military Review

The newest BTR-87 will be turned into a light-wheeled self-propelled gun

82
BTR-87 is a development of Military Industrial Company LLC and is a deeply modernized version of BTR-82А, which received a number of improvements. Unlike its predecessor, the BTR-87 received a stern location of the troop compartment, a much more powerful front-engined engine, as well as a universal turret chase. This will allow, if necessary, to install on it a whole arsenal of replaceable combat modules with various weapons and electronics.


As one of the equipment options, it is planned to install a modified remote-controlled combat module SDM-30. He is armed with an automatic 30-mm 2-42 cannon, which is capable of hitting lightly armored vehicles. To combat the enemy's manpower, a PKTM 7,62-mm machine gun was installed.

The newest BTR-87 will be turned into a light-wheeled self-propelled gun


Also, weapons can be supplemented with unguided missiles C-8, anti-tank guided missiles "Ataka-T" or rocket flamethrowers "Shmel-M".

In addition to the uninhabited modules, the BTR-87 can be used to mount a single Bereg compartment with a 30-mm cannon and an 7,62-mm machine gun. As a guided weapon, it is equipped with the Kornet-EM missile system, capable of striking ground and air targets at ranges up to 10 km.

The high carrying capacity of the BTR-87 allows, without any special modifications, to install on it an 120-mm combat compartment of the 2-23 “Nona-SVK” self-propelled gun. Transformed into a light wheeled self-propelled howitzer - a mortar, the machine will acquire the ability to hit engineering structures and armored vehicles with adjustable Kitol-2 projectiles at a distance of more than 12 km with an accuracy of 90%.

The armored personnel carrier with a mass increased to 16,5 tons is capable of speeding up to 90 km / h on the highway. Its power reserve at the same time can reach 800 km. Protection of the BTR-87 is enhanced by mounted armored ceramics. In a frontal projection, it withstands a shot from an 23-mm automatic cannon from a distance of 500 m, and on the side stands in front of the line from a machine gun of the 12,7 caliber mm.

According to experts, the BTR-87 will become an all-purpose armored vehicle, significantly superior to the previous generation in all characteristics, reports RG-Sila
Photos used:
Alexey Moiseyev
82 comments
Ad

Our projects are looking for authors in the news and analytical departments. Requirements for applicants: literacy, responsibility, efficiency, inexhaustible creative energy, experience in copywriting or journalism, the ability to quickly analyze text and check facts, write concisely and interestingly on political and economic topics. The work is paid. Contact: [email protected]

Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Shura Perm
    Shura Perm 29 November 2017 12: 32 New
    +2
    Kitolov’s prototype is already in Perm))) Motovilikhinsky plants have already done ...
    1. Jedi
      Jedi 29 November 2017 12: 42 New
      +4
      The plans for the BTR-87 are understandable. I hope there will be no tug of rubber with the implementation.
    2. just exp
      just exp 29 November 2017 12: 42 New
      +8
      the only question is - but the fig?
      or is it possible to bury the boomerang?
      Or will this copy be exported?
      1. Jedi
        Jedi 29 November 2017 12: 46 New
        +4
        Quote: just EXPL
        Or will this copy be exported?

        According to reports, the BTR-87 project was developed by the Military Industrial Company LLC as part of a thorough modernization of the existing BTR-82A armored personnel carrier. The project was created on an initiative basis and is intended primarily for export.

        Source: http://alternathistory.com/opytnyi-bronetransport
        er-btr-87-russiya
        1. just exp
          just exp 29 November 2017 13: 32 New
          +1
          Well, at least it pleases, but it got enough that all projects are stalled.
          Well, I thought that they were hedging and preparing a spare cheap platform.
          1. Forcecom
            Forcecom 29 November 2017 14: 18 New
            +2
            Well, as if one does not exclude the other.
          2. SERGUS
            SERGUS 29 November 2017 14: 46 New
            +1
            Quote: just EXPL
            it’s enough that all the projects are stalled.

            They do not skid, just recently we have loved to show off the skin of an animal not yet harvested.
      2. Mikado
        Mikado 29 November 2017 13: 17 New
        +2
        It seems they decided to do it "cheaply and cheerfully." While they bring the "boomerang", they will deliver advanced vehicles to the troops at the old base hi
      3. SERGUS
        SERGUS 29 November 2017 14: 58 New
        +2
        Quote: just EXPL
        or is it possible to bury the boomerang?

        According to official data, the BTR-87 was created primarily for export, but in my opinion these machines could coexist in our army, the BTR-87 is a simpler, cheaper machine, and that is sometimes a plus, it is lighter than a boomerang, which is more complicated and expensive. BTR-87, in my opinion, could be used, for example, when conducting counter-terrorist operations, etc.
      4. RF man
        RF man 29 November 2017 15: 15 New
        0
        Quote: just EXPL
        the only question is - but the fig?

        Maybe initiative development? .. Based on orders to modernize ours or abroad ..
        Maybe they all manage to get drunk in the old buildings -))
        1. RF man
          RF man 29 November 2017 15: 58 New
          +3
          Somehow the photo is not enough)
    3. siberalt
      siberalt 29 November 2017 12: 42 New
      +2
      A shovel was hung on board. But about the fire extinguisher and sand, apparently forgotten. belay
      1. Valery Saitov
        Valery Saitov 30 November 2017 06: 43 New
        +2
        So the main thing is a shovel, sand can already be obtained.
    4. 210ox
      210ox 29 November 2017 12: 44 New
      +2
      Now the brothers will shout that they have the idea of ​​BTR4 damned stole ..
      1. SERGUS
        SERGUS 29 November 2017 15: 02 New
        0
        Quote: 210ox
        Now the brothers will shout that they have the idea of ​​BTR4 damned stole ..

        The main thing is that the “brothers” were silent that when designing the BTR4, they stole the idea of ​​a wheel from someone laughing
        1. Uryukc
          Uryukc 29 November 2017 18: 31 New
          0
          The Sumerians?))
        2. Mih1974
          Mih1974 30 November 2017 13: 08 New
          +3
          lol
          You’re lying to FSE - the ancient Ukrainians not only dug up the Black Sea and poured the Caucasus Mountains, but came up with: a wheel, fat, pigs, fire, shag, dill and hemp. tongue Since then they are not letting go laughing
    5. Maz
      Maz 29 November 2017 19: 43 New
      +3
      Guys who did not dangle on the BMP cannot understand the joy of a motorized rifle for abandoning this tracked bandura. She is good, no words. But when there is a choice, the armed people without hesitation choose an armored personnel carrier.
  2. andrewkor
    andrewkor 29 November 2017 12: 43 New
    0
    Well, finally they moved away from the rear-mounted MTO - the BTR-60 ideology of 1959! Even UkrVPK refused this!
  3. Vitas
    Vitas 29 November 2017 12: 44 New
    0
    The motor in front is good.
    1. Orionvit
      Orionvit 30 November 2017 08: 27 New
      0
      Quote: Vitas
      The motor in front is good.

      But can he even swim, or is that all? If the landing compartment is behind, then the water cannon is gone, and the mass has increased.
      1. Chever
        Chever 30 November 2017 11: 28 New
        +1
        Quote: Orionvit
        Quote: Vitas
        The motor in front is good.

        But can he even swim, or is that all? If the landing compartment is behind, then the water cannon is gone, and the mass has increased.

        Rear movers for water are clearly visible behind
        1. Orionvit
          Orionvit 30 November 2017 12: 15 New
          0
          Quote: Chever
          Rear movers for water are clearly visible behind

          Sorry, I didn’t notice right away.
      2. Mih1974
        Mih1974 30 November 2017 13: 11 New
        +1
        Excuse me - FOR HORSE? request Oh, how many years amphibians have been doing and never really needed it anywhere
  4. hagrid
    hagrid 29 November 2017 12: 48 New
    +5
    Previously they talked about this photo - alteration of the BTR-60
    1. Vik66
      Vik66 29 November 2017 12: 54 New
      +2
      Not one of me means such associations caused this picture ... sad
    2. Sergey53
      Sergey53 29 November 2017 12: 54 New
      0
      In general, what's the difference? The main thing is that the end result is good.
      1. hagrid
        hagrid 29 November 2017 12: 55 New
        0
        the difference between btr-82a and btr-60
        1. Per se.
          Per se. 29 November 2017 13: 24 New
          +3
          The article is not very informative, they could have taken a different view of the photo to it, all the more so if it is mainly about “going through the backside”.
          BTR-87 received aft troop compartment - the troops had the opportunity to dismount through the stern doors under the cover of the entire machine. In front of the body of the BTR-87 there is a control compartment (left) and the engine compartment (at the starboard side). Directly behind the engine compartment placed the fighting compartment with a swivel tower. The sub-units of the combat compartment are placed in the same volume as the landing places.

          On the BTR-87 there are no side doors of the troop compartment, a commander's hatch and the right armored glass with a lid due to the placement of the engine compartment in front of the hull. The driver is located in front of the left. Commander's workplace shifted back and left. The commander is behind the back of the driver and must monitor the environment with the help of optical instruments on his hatch.
          In the central part of the hull, with a certain shift to the stern, a turret machine gun-gun installation borrowed from the BTR-87А was installed on the roof of the BTR-82. The tower has a monitor layout and is equipped with a set of barreled weapons. The 30-mm 2А72 automatic cannon is used as the “main caliber”, the additional armament consists of a PKTM 7,62-mm machine gun and several smoke grenade launchers. Also, the tower is equipped with a set of necessary means of observation and guidance.
          In terms of capacity, the troop compartment does not differ from the central troop compartment of the base BTR-82А. Landing and landing assault offered through the stern door.
          In connection with the transfer of the engine to the front of the case, the design of the transmission had to undergo noticeable changes. In this case, the chassis remained the same - four axles with wheels on an independent suspension. In connection with the use of the stern doors, the armored personnel carrier received new propulsion for moving through the water. Instead of a single central jet, two separate ones are now used, placed behind the wheels..
          1. MaksoMelan
            MaksoMelan 29 November 2017 14: 08 New
            +2
            I think the extra crossbar will be. Would do without it! Perhaps with hinged up and down. Or just down!
            1. Mih1974
              Mih1974 30 November 2017 13: 14 New
              +1
              I agree - in a fight, it’s better to jump and “jump at speed”, or even to fall over, by nothing more than “excess” on a slap - do not catch on.
              Moreover, the folding sills will not stand even the years of service, they will be broken off, bent, “I will hand over in reverse,” and there are a lot of options. no negative
  5. hagrid
    hagrid 29 November 2017 12: 57 New
    +1
    and if memory serves, many comments were made on water cannons
  6. Chestnut
    Chestnut 29 November 2017 13: 02 New
    0
    It's 2018, and we don’t even have dynamic protection !!!
    It should leave vicious practice to extend the shelf life of Soviet technology and schools, they are not oriented towards modern challenges.
  7. kolkulon
    kolkulon 29 November 2017 13: 02 New
    +3
    .Rubber BTR-90. They’re making fun of it.
    1. Per se.
      Per se. 29 November 2017 13: 33 New
      +3
      Yes, it is a pity. Maybe honor, intelligence and conscience will still wake up, the car is not deservedly “condemned” and forgotten. It could have been possible on the BTR-90 to “podshamanit” a lot, right up to this rear exit, although whether it is needed everywhere ...
  8. Belarus is Russia
    Belarus is Russia 29 November 2017 13: 04 New
    0
    According to experts, the BTR-87 will become an all-purpose armored vehicle, significantly superior to the previous generation in all characteristics, reports RG-Sila

    This is good. The old should get better. Stronger, faster, more powerful, more secure, and so on.
    1. siberalt
      siberalt 29 November 2017 13: 10 New
      +1
      But from that it will not cease to be old. bully
  9. Belarus is Russia
    Belarus is Russia 29 November 2017 13: 09 New
    +1
    Quote: just EXPL
    the only question is - but the fig?
    or is it possible to bury the boomerang?
    Or will this copy be exported?

    You don’t need to bury a boomerang. And you need to equip the Russian Orthodox Church with a boomerang. You need to have the Russian Orthodox Church already equipped with boomerangs. And do the old technology too, upgrade it to the limit until such a technique is invented that will surpass the old one so that the old equipment will no longer need to be modernized. Because the new one will block the entire modernization of the old equipment.
    The only way out, so as not to sell your Russian new military equipment to foreign countries and troops, is to upgrade the old one, which will be inferior to the new military equipment of the Russian Orthodox Church. In order for foreign troops and countries to be weaker than the Russian Orthodox Church.
  10. Alexey-74
    Alexey-74 29 November 2017 13: 14 New
    0
    Again a new option. Where's the boomerang ??? What is all forgotten?
    1. Valery Saitov
      Valery Saitov 30 November 2017 06: 54 New
      0
      The technical solutions incorporated in Boomerang are more interesting, modern and cheaper.
      - When can you still wait for him in the army?
      - I can’t name the exact dates, but we go to the finish line. It is flattering that our car completed the Victory Parade, but this is a new car, and we continue to work on armor, weight, ergonomics, weapons. Therefore, we would not want to say what it will be at the exit. Now we are testing 12 cars: roll, shoot, burn, freeze. Work is underway to use various types of armor.
      We have a test procedure, some laboratory work on this machine 250: freezers, explosions, shots, upheavals. So as soon as we pass the exam, deliveries to the troops will begin immediately.
  11. Belarus is Russia
    Belarus is Russia 29 November 2017 13: 18 New
    0
    Quote: siberalt
    But from that it will not cease to be old. bully

    When was the first car invented ????? But modern cars, after all, have stepped far from the first cars ???? But all the same, modern cars are all the same cars anyway. That is, by your logic, these are OLD cars-cars. Well, it’s still a car, albeit a new one. And if a car is an old technique, not new. For example, not some or some tulibub there, let's say, not a completely new technique, different from a car, but anyway a car.
    So you can upgrade the old military equipment, which will be very different from its predecessor. Like new cars, from old ones.
    At the same time, make and develop a completely new military equipment and technology. Do not forget about the modernization of old equipment.
  12. Herculesic
    Herculesic 29 November 2017 13: 24 New
    0
    Then it would be better to launch the BTR 90 series!
  13. Mikhail Zubkov
    Mikhail Zubkov 29 November 2017 13: 32 New
    +1
    Quote: kolkulon
    .Rubber BTR-90. They’re making fun of it.

    The layout is nothing fundamentally new - and are silent about buoyancy. The chip of our armored personnel carriers was in it, starting with the BTR-60 PB. And two rear engines made it possible to pull out the car and people in case of damage from under the fire at least somehow. Front engine protection is the risk of machine death from the first hit on the forehead. At the same time, the cumulative projectile will also kill people in the APCs - the gases are inflated anyway and will be killed by a pressure surge. The roof must be made removable - with cumulative lesions it kills people. It is needed only as an awning from the rain, and not armored protection - with the modern saturation of troops with anti-tank equipment.
    1. marlin1203
      marlin1203 29 November 2017 13: 52 New
      +4
      In this case, the hatch on a makeshift belt dangles, and does not lock completely. Military savvy however.
      1. Mikhail Zubkov
        Mikhail Zubkov 29 November 2017 22: 29 New
        +1
        I took the rights to BTR-40, and from the BTR-152 I performed exercises at the shooting range. I think the roof foolishness on the armored personnel carrier is after taking Budapest in 1956, when grenades SUCCESSFULLY hit the armored personnel carrier in the city - IN RARE CASES. For urban battles, special equipment is needed, and everything began to be covered with roofs, and as a result, in Afghanistan, landings fell on the roofs - from "mass graves" from RPGs or cumulative mines. We need to think about the roofs - we need transformable or removable ones. And the wheels are already more efficient than the tracks on most TVDs.
        1. Mih1974
          Mih1974 30 November 2017 13: 28 New
          +1
          Review the "Pentagon Wars", there at the very beginning of the creation of "Bradley" was a very good phrase ".. so it turns out they did a bus to deliver soldiers to the front line .. How did they get THIS?" (from). Here you offer the same thing, an armored personnel carrier is really a “bus” for delivery to the front line, but a “bus” cannot fight while the military “heads” decided to arm it and throw it into battle. What you offer is the “Kurgan” a la idea, already implemented by Yvrey, “to take the hull from the tank and make an armored personnel carrier from it”. And you’re right - you shouldn’t climb armored personnel carriers into the city under grenade launchers and ATGMs, this is not at all a task. But Izrail is not Russia for you, we can’t get from one “front line” to another “in an hour”, therefore we need “over-armored” armored personnel carriers for the front line, and these “buses” are not at all designed to be exposed attack of the enemy.
          And believe me - such a trend around the world, no one has managed to create a universal armored personnel carrier, or a "fighting turtle" but slow and expensive or a "bus" but with no protection against modern means.
          The American "Bradley" is generally a "sign", this Pentagon geek did not become a "bus" and did not become an over-protected turtle negative .
    2. Genry
      Genry 29 November 2017 14: 11 New
      +1
      BTR87 is a mobile firing point for shooting fast targets (jihad mobiles in Syria), which should be located in a prepared shelter such as a caponier or ditch, must survive shelling from fragmentation shells and have the ability to change positions very quickly. It can be used to deliver resources through areas with possible fire.
      For open assault operations, a completely different technique with different types of protection should be used.
      I am worried about another question. When they make a 9mm machine gun for the technician. 7,62mm is frankly weak, and 12,7mm is difficult to feed.
      1. Anyone
        Anyone 29 November 2017 14: 44 New
        +2
        BTR-87 - a product so far focused not on the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation, but on export. Therefore, in theory, to cover the largest possible number of potential buyers, it should have a certain universality in terms of combat use. If it is not very suitable for assault operations, then this is its minus (commercially).
        Regarding the 9-mm machine gun ... And under which, excuse me, the cartridge will be this hypothetical machine gun? Under 9x18 PM? )) And why is this "7,62 mm frankly weak." Justify. It is desirable regarding options for specific combat applications ..
        1. Valery Saitov
          Valery Saitov 30 November 2017 07: 04 New
          0
          In the USSR, on the basis of the standard 7,62x39mm cartridge, the US cartridge (reduced speed) with a heavy 12-gram bullet was created. This cartridge was intended for use in AKM with PBS (silent shooting device). On the basis of this cartridge in the 80s, the cartridge SP-5, SP-6, PAB-9, 9 mm caliber, was developed.

          The cartridge case is a cartridge case 7.62x39mm, with a dulce re-communicated under a 9-mm bullet. The SP-5 cartridge is sniper, that is, it is made with high accuracy and has a 16-gram shell bullet with a steel core surrounded by lead.

          The speed of a bullet when firing from a special VSS Vintorez sniper rifle or AS Val machine-gun is 280–300 m / s. Muzzle energy - about 600-700 J.

          Cartridge SP-6 is an "assault" and is designed to hit targets that are hidden in cars or protected by bulletproof vests. The SP-6 bullet has a mass of 16,2 grams and a hardened steel core. In the head of the bullet, the core protrudes from under the shell of the bullet (that is, the semi-shell bullet).
          1. Valery Saitov
            Valery Saitov 30 November 2017 07: 15 New
            0
            Manufacturers
            Klimovsky specialized cartridge plant.
          2. Genry
            Genry 30 November 2017 10: 29 New
            0
            Quote: Valery Saitov
            The SP-6 cartridge is an “assault” one and is designed to hit targets that are hidden in cars or protected by bulletproof vests ...

            This is the correct information, only what does this intermediate cartridge have to do with a tank machine gun?
            We need a new 9mm cartridge, namely, a machine gun, cheap, under the tape, which has the best reliability of operation of the weapon, i.e. with a protruding edge, similar to 7,62x54R.
        2. Genry
          Genry 30 November 2017 10: 36 New
          0
          Quote: Anyone
          And why is this "7,62 mm frankly weak."

          Weak, because already at a distance of 10 meters it can not immediately destroy the enemy in body armor of the 5th class (according to the old 6th). About 300 meters, there’s nothing to talk about. This is the cartridge of the times when armor was forgotten, and body armor has not yet been invented.
      2. Mikhail Zubkov
        Mikhail Zubkov 29 November 2017 22: 40 New
        0
        You can return to the euro-caliber of 7,92 periods of WWI and WWII. In this caliber there were armor-piercing bolts in a number of countries, and we probably still have everything in trophies, and the best is German. But even Ukrainians are retraining infantry for 12,7 caliber machine guns. And we need to go into that caliber.
        1. Genry
          Genry 30 November 2017 10: 40 New
          0
          Quote: Mikhail Zubkov
          You can return to the euro-caliber of 7,92 periods of WWI and WWII.

          Ie take the old shit with the organization of a new cartridge and weapons production. And what is the advantage of 7,92 over 7,62?
          Quote: Mikhail Zubkov
          machine guns caliber 12,7

          Tame? Do you know exactly what you're talking about?
          But the truth is that on armor they are very attractive, but voracious and with a high cost of a cartridge with a groove.
      3. Mikhail Zubkov
        Mikhail Zubkov 29 November 2017 22: 50 New
        0
        12,7 should already be with good optics, and with the expectation of AIMING fire, and not on the fire "in the direction" of the target. With a queue cut-off and with a single mode. With recoil dampers and other bells and whistles.
        1. Genry
          Genry 30 November 2017 10: 50 New
          0
          Quote: Mikhail Zubkov
          with the aim of AIMING fire, and not on the fire "in the direction" of the target.

          In a split second, you are unlikely to be able to accurately aim and most of the fire is conducted not to defeat, but to suppress, so as not to be shot, hit.
          Quote: Mikhail Zubkov
          With recoil dampers

          There are flame dampers (flame arresters) and recoil compensators ....
          Weapons should not be spoken about in confectionery.
      4. Mih1974
        Mih1974 30 November 2017 13: 30 New
        +1
        Where 7,62 fails, there you can "add" a pair of 30 mm shells good laughing
        1. Genry
          Genry 30 November 2017 21: 29 New
          0
          Quote: Mih1974
          Where 7,62 fails, there you can "add" a pair of 30 mm shells

          From a cannon, sparrows ... You are unlikely to hit the target with one shot. We need the same line, only the size of the ammunition and the cost of the shot will be sub-optimal. Or you are hoping for a close detonation of a shell, it’s not worth it ...
  14. dvvv
    dvvv 29 November 2017 13: 56 New
    +1
    and meanwhile, BTR-82 rivets and rivets. For me, this car is better than the 82nd and a comparable price should be. If you do something else with the armor and not lose buoyancy, then a cheap and affordable armored personnel carrier. The engine is licensed, although they write that they are not able to do part of the details and import it into the YaMZ, but all the same they refuse from KaMazovsky 740. In general, a reasonable direction, I think, it remains to think about the price and performance. What will happen to the self-propelled gun and whether it is needed, let the soldiers decide.
  15. Nemesis
    Nemesis 29 November 2017 14: 43 New
    0
    BMP USA and NATO have a 25-30 mm gun and frontal armor of domestic armored vehicles should be done on this basis ... And the installation of a 120 mm module was possible on the BTR-90.
    1. Anyone
      Anyone 29 November 2017 14: 59 New
      +5
      Do not confuse BMPs with APCs. The BTR’s main task is to deliver soldiers to the battlefield and is a secondary task! - fire support, and the BMP - direct support and fire support of the infantry. Therefore, the BMP and the armor is thicker, and the profile is lower, and more powerful weapons
      1. dvvv
        dvvv 29 November 2017 15: 09 New
        +1
        and yet, lately, the global trend for armor is thicker and mine action more.
        1. The comment was deleted.
          1. Nemesis
            Nemesis 29 November 2017 15: 30 New
            0
            Making the armor of the new BTR thinner than the BTR-90 makes no sense at all ...
            1. Anyone
              Anyone 29 November 2017 15: 38 New
              0
              Here is a thinker, ideally, booking in general should be done modular. Need to strengthen - installed an additional module. No need - took off.
              1. Nemesis
                Nemesis 29 November 2017 16: 15 New
                0
                On the one hand, I agree with you, on the other hand, after the war in Chechnya, we can safely say that parquet generals will always be tempted to send equipment into battle, without additional protection, as tanks already sent into battle, without active armor blocks .. . It is better to have heavy armored personnel carriers and infantry fighting vehicles, and Sherman tanks, from the times of World War II, could still sail, despite the weight of about 40 tons ...
                1. Anyone
                  Anyone 29 November 2017 17: 30 New
                  +3
                  Well, every war reveals the weaknesses of technology, tactics, application, and everything else. Naturally, it is better to be rich and healthy (crossed out), it is good to have, among other things, protected BMPs. The question is the cost and feasibility of modernization, which is more like a complete reconstruction. Sometimes it will be better and cheaper to make a new, heavier BMP than to turn the old one into the result of using crazy pens (this is about the HTZ product - there was a topic here recently).
                  A propos, Palsergeech was not a parquet general. He fought twice in Afghanistan, the 103rd VDD commanded. The Guard nevertheless (not modern, the mental guard, which Putin had invented, but the real one). Why he so screwed up in Chechnya, I do not know. PS In my time in Afghanistan I went for escort on “seventies” driven by two gas engines from GAZ. And nothing. And after a year of service in combat conditions, I could no longer swim, probably not a single armored personnel carrier - all were full of holes, like a sieve))
                  1. Nemesis
                    Nemesis 29 November 2017 18: 45 New
                    0
                    And I’ll tell you why and how ... I know one major, he tells everyone that he is a colonel and a participant in the hostilities ... All of his participation: he took the humanitarian aid twice and drunk in a dugout, far from the front line .... ..You yourself write that soviet armored personnel carriers, after a year of service could no longer swim, it means there isn’t much sense in them, especially since the stocks of such equipment are huge ... To save due to the fighting qualities of the equipment, it means losing in battle and equipment and personnel ... Russia is now in no position to scatter soldiers ... Russia needs to adopt the experience of Israel and adopt the most protected equipment, and it is necessary to save on outdoor parties of the Abramovich ...
                    1. faiver
                      faiver 29 November 2017 19: 07 New
                      +1
                      after a year of service in fighting conditions - it is written
                      the size of Israel and Russia are not commensurate, we do not forget logistics
                      Well, with savings on Abramovich, you didn’t get there laughing
                      1. Nemesis
                        Nemesis 29 November 2017 20: 25 New
                        0
                        And did you get there, with your calls to save on the army due to the quality of military equipment ?! In Russia, serious problems with demography and no migrants will replace the indigenous population of the country, especially in case of war. Russia needs to protect its soldiers, and not money for drunkards on Rublevka ...
                    2. Anyone
                      Anyone 29 November 2017 19: 56 New
                      +2
                      About "full of holes", I did not write because the BTR-70 was bad. For his time, he was good (except for gasoline engines and KPVT). What you called "soviet equipment", coupled with competent use and a common command, allowed the USSR to achieve a figure of ~ 1000 killed per year, which for such large-scale military operations is absolutely excellent. And with respect to enhancing the protection of the crew, I have no objections. Well, there’s just a question ... What thickness of armor plates do you propose to install on an armored personnel carrier, taking into account that the DShK (excluding the projection of the target - average this) will pierce about 1000 mm rolled armor with ammunition from 15 m, and the aforementioned KPVT - even whole 25 mm? (about how many mm penetrates the TOW of the 1971 shaggy year of development, I believe it makes no sense at all to speak in the context of an APC)
                      Z.Y. The post is addressed not to faiver (I agree with him), but to the previous speaker))
                      1. Nemesis
                        Nemesis 29 November 2017 20: 32 New
                        0
                        1) Protection against ATGMs, even on tanks, is primarily active armor, because the ATGM warhead and rocket armor are not an important defense against it .... Although, in Chechnya, there were times when a shot from an RPG went into rebound, having fallen into the inclined armored personnel carrier of armored personnel carriers, which is already not bad ... It’s not only one person’s life saved ... 2) As for armor, the frontal must withstand at least a shot from a 25 mm Bradley BMP gun, and an onboard shot from KPVT 14,5 , 14,5 mm ... In Chechnya, the militants used Elephant sniper rifles of XNUMX mm caliber of Czechoslovak manufacture ... When the enemy possesses such weapons there is no point in lightly armored vehicles that are defenseless against such weapons ...
                      2. Nemesis
                        Nemesis 29 November 2017 20: 45 New
                        0
                        Generally speaking, if the armor on the new armored personnel carrier will be significantly strengthened compared to the BTR-80-82A, then this is a step in the right direction ...
        2. Mih1974
          Mih1974 30 November 2017 13: 37 New
          +1
          And sho? no No armor can save an armored personnel carrier from even an old anti-tank mine, and even more so from an anti-tank vehicle. And note that the last time these ATGMs divorced as dogs not cut, ukrovermaht even for single soldiers of Novorossia not stingy to run.
          Yes, you need a small increase in armor, different mine action methods (V shaped bottom for example), but all these measures should not cancel the very task of BTP - delivering fighters to the front line, but not to the battle itself.
          1. Nemesis
            Nemesis 30 November 2017 14: 48 New
            0
            The fighting showed that armored personnel carriers are no longer used to deliver infantry to the battlefield. An armored personnel carrier needs to be done just like a wheeled infantry fighting vehicle.
  16. faiver
    faiver 29 November 2017 19: 08 New
    0
    in my opinion a normal youngster, nehve riveted if necessary ... hi
  17. eburg1234
    eburg1234 29 November 2017 20: 03 New
    0
    If objectively, the full replacement of the BTR-80 / 82A with the Boomerang can only be dreamed of: it is a matter of decades (as well as the replacement of the T-72/80/90 with the T-14). And in fact, the “Boomerang” is a wheeled infantry fighting vehicle, not an armored personnel carrier (the variant with the KMK machine-gun mount will not go into series at all).
    So a rearranged car like the BTR-87 has the right to life as an BTR.
  18. Normal ok
    Normal ok 29 November 2017 21: 21 New
    0
    Damn, but only yesterday everyone who was alternatively thinking, neighing over the Australian Armed Forces tender for the purchase of similar devices.
  19. Anyone
    Anyone 29 November 2017 21: 38 New
    +2
    You did not confuse the APC with anything else? )) If an APC is used not only as a front-line vehicle, but also as a means of directly supporting infantry, then this is permissible only if the enemy does not have effective anti-tank weapons. Otherwise, the BTR commander should evade a direct clash as soon as possible. Actually, here you need to write not "evade as quickly as possible", but "dump it very quickly"))
    The armored personnel carrier has bulletproof and anti-shatter armor. Well, the frontal, ideally, should keep a hit of 20 mm. The designers of the armored personnel carrier did not set tasks to ensure the impenetrability of armor with the Bushmaster cannon. And now they don’t. Is there any sense in creating a frontal armored vehicle protection, which is guaranteed not to be pierced by a 25 mm caliber ammunition in the forehead from a distance of 1000 meters, if this armored personnel carrier can be penetrated from a PC? And the DShK in the lateral projection and from the BTR generally makes a two-sided colander.
    Regarding RPGs and other javelins, tou-cornets ... Anything can happen. My friend Zhenya received, with an interval of a couple of seconds, two PG grenades on board. One in the rear left wheel, the second in the tower. After that he propelled another 50 meters and drowned an armored personnel carrier in Argandab. Well, as I drowned ... I drowned a little - there was a meter of depth))
    PS Yes, and the Yankees do not make such a reservation as you want. Now, look what happens from the M113 armored personnel carrier after firing into the side from a 12,7 mm machine gun
  20. seregatara1969
    seregatara1969 29 November 2017 22: 30 New
    0
    universal frantic epaulette - terrible power in skillful hands
  21. silver169
    silver169 30 November 2017 05: 48 New
    0
    Madhouse. Why use the base of an essentially outdated armored personnel carrier when there is the latest Boomerang? Is it really impossible to install a module with a 120-mm gun on it? So instead of unification and uniformity, the Russian armored vehicles will have the same problems as the Navy - the heterogeneity which makes the operation and maintenance of equipment too expensive.
    1. badens1111
      badens1111 30 November 2017 13: 54 New
      0
      Quote: silver169
      Is it really impossible to install a module with a 120-mm gun on it?

      And why on the armored personnel carrier 120 MM PREPARATION? How already tired of the warhammer players ..
  22. vzglyadjaguar.
    vzglyadjaguar. 2008 30 November 2017 23: 52 New
    +1
    Not bad. Probably like it.