Slowly retooling: CFL marines received new BTR-82A

Caspian Marines flotilla received a company kit of the latest BTR-82A armored personnel carriers. This was reported in the press service of the Southern Military District.

The spokesperson of the Southern Military District Vadim Astafyev, a division of the Marine Corps of the Caspian Flotilla deployed in Dagestan, received from the Nizhny Novgorod region more than 10 of the latest BTR-82А, which are currently being prepared for winter conditions. This is not the first delivery of armored personnel carriers to the CFL Marine Corps, he noted, in May-June of this year, the marines received about 60 BTR-82А, which replaced outdated BTR-25 that had been standing for more than 80 years in service.

In total, since 2010, the troops of the Southern Military District received more than 8,5 thousand units of the latest and modernized weapons and equipment as part of the state rearmament program. In the plans of the district command by 2020 to bring the share of modern samples of all types of weapons and military equipment on land, sea and aviation component up to 70%, and for some samples up to 100%.

Comments

[Ros 56]

The author evidently read my comment, where I wrote that we will slowly, lightly arm our army with new equipment. Plagiarism is called, to the barrier.

[URAL72]

We would need this old-new one, 30mm is not a joke, in fact beh-2, but on a mine the bester is much better than the track, the behi has a body at the seams, and only the wheel will vomit out of the batter, but the crew is shell-shocking. And on the water, so generally a boat! My reconnaissance patrol on the BTR-70, where the ambush is!

[Korax71]

before that there were MTLBV6MB on the CFL with exactly the same 2a72. although there will be better fluff from behi2 2a42. But the behu 3 would be better. Wheel equipment does not win in cross-country ability especially on the coast.

[URAL72]

For BMP, not enough. 57mm + two ptura, that's it. For BTR thirty, just, especially with birds. It would be nice to add a mortar, as on a merkava, 82mm is enough. Well, to put a hundred, I think busting, after all, this is a vehicle, and not a combat vehicle, even an IFV.

[Korax71]

boat at a speed of 8-9km / h with limited seaworthiness, let's say, and behi 3 he does not win in this regard at all. if as a means of over-the-horizon landing, then armored personnel carriers and infantry fighting vehicles are not the best option. our industry does not produce specialized floating armored personnel carriers. and the barotrauma that is there, that of the crew and the landing there. It is already more dependent on the reservation. Consciously, firepower, security and patency of behi will be better.

[URAL72]

Btr - not BMP! "Go" to the army. From your point of view, you don't need anything other than a tank. He has the same caliber! I'm in the intelligence of the DNR SME, what the hell is an BMP for me? As for the boat, I meant buoyancy and maneuverability on the water. We do not have BMP-3, but they pulled the two out of the river, moreover, they WERE ON THE WATER until everyone has crossed. And about the troika, it's time to forget, Kurganets is on the way, and he is much better.

[Korax71]

Uncle, I’m telling you as an individual that the contract in the Marine Corps, with experience in conducting military operations in this region, I’m saying that we drooled, what’s the reason you’ve spied intelligence and DNR? You judge from your bell tower without understanding specifics, no features. when you have a sea in the Dnieper, landing ships, then we’ll talk about how an armored personnel carrier behaves on a much larger size than a puddle, or how good its driving performance on a sandy shore. I’m not the only one trying to explain it to you.

[URAL72]

And I'm trying to explain to you that the MP does not need only tanks or infantry fighting vehicles, because the article does not indicate which unit the vehicles arrived in, or do you have no intelligence? So why do they need this BMP? Does intelligence end where the battle begins, or does the MP have a different way? And which one conducts a landing without reconnaissance, which also carries out fire adjustment and, if necessary, turns into a DRG in the rear of the defenders? Considering that the MP of the Russian Federation is so far used without landing, like infantry, it is better for you to pay attention to our specifics, and judging by the Caucasus, this has already been done, but they did not report to you personally. And if you dropped from the TDK to the BMP in Chechnya, then I missed something, I'll go study the materiel.

[Korax71]

There is an expression that if you are stupid like a tree, you’ll be born a baobab. Once again, 10 units for 414 RPMs, which were quartered and previously part of 77ogbrmp.sht, there was nothing in life in service with the reconnaissance battalion, except for the brdm. air, or with the involvement of special units of the mp or navy. or do you start a whole landing operation to land a reconnaissance unit along with equipment like armored personnel carriers ??? then each reconnaissance needs to draw a cross on its forehead before landing. It’s not from one village to another for moonshine fly. places of possible landings are strictly limited and have long been known to everyone. therefore, reconnaissance will be carried out on the 11th number. if you are not in the know, then the battalion has 3 infantry companies, an art battery, a tank company, a communications platoon. Its tasks include capture and expansion of the bridgehead for the subsequent delivery of ground units to it. and in order to crush the defense in any case, we need firepower and at least some kind of armor for God forbid the landing and we will definitely be there everyone who can can wait. in Chechnya, the Marine Corps was used only because at that time it was one of the most well-organized and trained units. The combat training program included both mountain training and combat in urban areas, ignoramuses study the mat part further and do not argue with people who understand some issues more than you.

[Korax71]

Oh well, do not explain to a person his intelligence on BTR70 embroiders with flags and banners.

[Oden280]

They require machines modified according to their requirements, and these are essentially completely new models. So they give something that at least somehow fits.

[Korax71]

I agree for 200% beha 3 the most suited option was both in terms of firepower and in driving performance both on land and at sea. but it is not destiny. even if the troika had a water speed of 20 to 25 km and a range of one hundred square meters, they could finally solve the problem with over-the-horizon disembarkation equipment. It’s a direct real competitor to Amer’s EFV.

[Korax71]

The option is chic, what can I say. Unification for the military branches and for components and ammunition. Immediately the supply issues would be resolved many times easier. For the time, the thing was excellent yet at least some kind of armor and good firepower with the possibility of firing from the water .

[Korax71]

That's about the airborne straight off the tongue if mp were like a mattress as a separate branch of the army and a reserve of the supreme, then they would rearm if they wanted, and the fleet with aviation would be their own. For the Airborne Forces there are really a lot of interesting buns, although the probability of landing with equipment is a more or less large unit behind enemy lines in the event of a conflict, it’s zero. The experience of both Afghanistan and Chechnya showed that the same landings needed tanks and infantry fighting vehicles, and that the bmd didn’t provide either firepower or armor. by assault units. MP was always part of the Navy, and it was funded based on priorities, which is more important. In the case of a large shecher, the story of 41 years, when landing operations were carried out without being carried out by tugboats and rafts, will be hoped that we have people in Russia knows what he's doing .... probably

[Korax71]

I like one whole retired lieutenant colonel with foam at the mouth proved the opposite I don’t understand either, if in the event of a conflict we provide a corridor with complete air supremacy for the landing, then it’s easier to move heavily armed motorized rifle units along this corridor than to turn around with the BTA. Many foreign airborne forces are part of the ground forces. They are simply highly mobile units. .even on the example of the 101th Airborne Division of the United States, if we consider their task in the shortest possible time to deploy their units. the actions of this unit during a desert storm are a vivid example. they very mobile moved from one direction to another, seized a bridgehead and held until the approach of land units or sea infantry. in fact, all the landings were carried out from helicopters. Moreover, they have long been deviating towards the air assault units. And in general, these reptiles have a very interesting organizational structure of the military branches and individual units. The same kmp is not big from anyone a dependent, self-sufficient army capable of Act on almost any TV. sorry we have a slightly different concept.

[Oden280]

Yeah. on purpose. Only seaworthiness is not what and even afloat from the ship can go only in calm weather.

[Oden280]

You do not read Wikipedia. BMP when leaving the ramp dives so that the air intakes, the very elongated ones, go under water, and it pops up very reluctantly. All the same, 22 tons. And the presence of UDC imitates a bunch of all sorts of other necessary.

[Oden280]

BTR is not so much. It looks more like a float. In general, this topic with BMP has been stretching since the days of the USSR. Even then, they tried to adapt both BMP and BMD for the marines. Somehow it didn’t work out. Of this series, only the BTR-50 still came up and that's it.

[Korax71]

Even the MTLBV is landing on the float, only the speed of 4-5 km is astounding. It was just that no one thought it necessary to develop means of over-the-horizon landing, it’s very expensive. Any landing craft, be it armored personnel carriers, infantry fighting vehicles, Fri, which does not go into planing mode, but moving in the displacement mode it will create a dull and terrible sight. Increase the speed for reaching a stable glis in the absence of sea waves - 25-27 km h. For this, the same armored personnel carrier, the BMP will have to be redrawn, reduce weight, increase the power of the water-jet propulsion, in short one solid hemorrhoids. The Americans coped with this issue well, but the cost turned out to be very, very undemocratic. The most balanced variant according to the set of characteristics was BMP 3.A any technique that does not have positive buoyancy dives during landing. The same armored vehicle is kept on the water due to lift , which occurs only when moving. It will stop moving and this float will immediately turn into a good ax and will go to the bottom easily and will not accept nicely.

[Korax71]

The amers eventually turned out to be roughly the same as our armored personnel carrier with bulletproof armor of just greater capacity and good water speed, though at the price of a cast-iron bridge across the ocean. And again, it is good if you need to recall the number of landing on the coast with minimal fire. it fits well with their strategy, because the number of carrier-based aircraft covering the landing will be more than mosquitoes in the swamp. This will be both the air wing of the airborne and the airborne landing itself, of course, an exit, but then the staff structure will be suggested in the image and likeness of a mattress. and this is crazy, archie, mega dear to the availability of udk, the question immediately becomes, and who will provide its cover and access to the deployment line, not to mention the supply issues. Most likely, the story will repeat with the exercise of the marine corps and the transfer of its functions to the ground forces. such actions are also predictable. If honestly, it’s generally difficult to imagine unloading equipment on pontoons under conditions of amphibious assault

[exalibor]

it’s like rearming ... but at such a pace you can again not be in time as in 41 ... catch with the pants down ... (((what are 10 units .... 60 units ... when are thousands needed?

[andrewkor]

And I always liked the BTR-90. It's a pity they didn’t accept it. And the BTR-82, at least something!

[kolkulon]

The newest can be called "Boomerang" but 82a.

[Fregate]

Moreover, if I am not mistaken, the letter "A" means that this is a converted BTR-80 into BTR-82, and not a new BTR-82.

[kolkulon]

So I am about the same. The module was stuck in and it became the newest. And we neigh over neighbors with their "bucephalus"

[Tomich3]

the newest yeah, this is in fact the BTR-80 upgraded to the level of the BTR-82A. Modernization is carried out in the course of overhaul at repair enterprises. The newest one is Boomerang, but there is no money for it.

[Tomich3]

BTR-87 - a deep modernization of the BTR-82A, has a completely new armored corps with a front engine-transmission compartment and a rear compartment for paratroopers. Developed by the Military Industrial Company LLC (GAZ Group) and is mainly intended for export. It was first shown in June 2015 at the international military-technical forum "Army 2015" in the Patriot Kubinka park. It has not been adopted yet, therefore, one does not even have to talk about the reality of replacement.