Military Review

The Turks showed a floating BTR, specially designed for the new UDC

36
The Turkish company FNSS Savunma Sistemleri (a joint venture of the Turkish holding Nurol and the corporation BAE Systems) presented a prototype of the floating tracked ZAHA armored personnel carrier (Zırhlı Amfibi Hücum Araçları), created for use in the first Turkish UDC L 400 Anadolu, reports bMH blog bm


The Turks showed a floating BTR, specially designed for the new UDC


The contract for the design, development and production of the ZAHA floating combat vehicles for equipping the universal landing craft under construction for the Turkish Navy was signed in March 27 between FNSS and the Turkish Defense Industry Directorate. Of the ordered vehicles, 2017 should be released as conventional armored personnel carriers, two - command and staff and two more - as armored repair and recovery vehicles (BREM).

The ZAHA BTR is a further development of the AAV7 armored personnel carrier for the US Marine Corps (formerly LVTP-7), but with a new armored corps, engine compartment and recycled undercarriage.

The declared combat weight of the machine is 30 tons. As an armored troop-carrier, the vehicle accommodates three crew members and twenty-one paratroopers. The body is made of 5000 series aluminum-magnesium alloy and reinforced by spaced-mounted ceramic armor panels. It is stated that this provides protection against armor-piercing bullets of caliber 14,5 mm. There are elements of mine protection.

For afloat, there are two water cannons that provide full speed at 7 nodes. The machine can move on water in case of agitation no more than 2-x points, and when using a special "nautical" set (pipe-snorkels, etc.) - up to 4-x points.

The armored personnel carrier has five all-round cameras with day and thermal imaging channels. The BTR is equipped with a Turkish-made BIUS. Armament can be installed differently depending on the tasks performed. In the present embodiment, the BNR is equipped with a remotely controlled combat module of its own design, FNSS, with the 12,7-mm M2 machine gun and the 40-mm automatic grenade launcher.

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

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Piramidon
    Piramidon 6 May 2019 12: 55
    +5
    Something it reminds me of
    1. donavi49
      donavi49 6 May 2019 13: 39
      12
      Conceptually, American AAV is this, only they decided to do it themselves, based on existing technologies, capabilities and requirements, and not ask Trump to sell.

    2. Galleon
      Galleon 6 May 2019 13: 41
      +1
      And not only this
  2. MTR theme
    MTR theme 6 May 2019 12: 58
    -5
    Well done Turks. It is a pity that our generals do not understand the usefulness and universality of the Marine Corps. Moreover, the status of the troops was dropped ...
    1. neri73-r
      neri73-r 6 May 2019 13: 25
      -8
      Quote: MTR theme
      Well done Turks. It is a pity that our generals do not understand the usefulness and universality of the Marine Corps. Moreover, the status of the troops was dropped ...

      We have nowhere to land, if only in Odessa! laughing
      1. MTR theme
        MTR theme 6 May 2019 13: 55
        -5
        Already landed and Syria ... without airborne
        1. neri73-r
          neri73-r 6 May 2019 14: 19
          +3
          Quote: MTR theme
          Already landed and Syria ... without airborne

          And why is there an airborne? There is someone who can not by number, but by skill, quietly, but with a soul, MTR! hi Airborne troops there will be needed if the Yankees personally climb, instead of the airborne troops there is Assad’s regular army, this is their country, let them make their contribution.
    2. Tahtvjd2868
      Tahtvjd2868 6 May 2019 19: 02
      +1
      Maybe it’s more about politicians who generally have little idea of ​​the purpose and essence of the Fleet as a whole and the marine corps as its component!
      1. ProkletyiPirat
        ProkletyiPirat 7 May 2019 02: 11
        +2
        Quote: Tahtvjd2868
        Maybe it’s more about politicians who generally have little idea of ​​the purpose and essence of the Fleet as a whole and the marine corps as its component!

        No, the point is precisely in the Navy and its management elite. For many decades there is a continuous mess and a waste of resources on useless "projects". In itself, this is not so scary, only "there is no money for really necessary projects, but you are holding on." For example, do you know that over the decades (from the 50s-60s) not a single head of the Navy bothered to draw up a plan for the development of water infrastructure? It would seem that this is difficult? all you need to do in certain places is to impose civil-military restrictions on the use of the coastal territory. But this was not done, and as a result, the territories that should have been given for ports, shipyards, their infrastructure and auxiliary industries were built up by private owners, and residential neighborhoods, who will now demolish and rebuild it? what Or, for example, they allocated a lot of money for ekranoplanes \ BDK \ ... from which there is zero sense because in practice they are not applicable in battle, or our vaunted helicopter carriers and aircraft carriers, allocated a lot of money for ships, there are a lot of guns and rackets, but the most important thing is not there , there is no this very aviation and its support, but "the exercises were carried out successfully", "the most" and "unparalleled in the world." fool
        1. core
          core 7 May 2019 08: 50
          -1
          just don’t have to balabil the Far East, for example, there’s nowhere to put up a civilian tent; The governor of the Far East personally asked the president to regulate his appetites. enterprises, there are investors there is no land, in the Far East there is no land a couple of hundred hectares. to build something useful. again, in Crimea, the president asked the military to move in. the military has a lot of land, but like a dog in the manger. neither you nor myself. the most confused territories.
          1. ProkletyiPirat
            ProkletyiPirat 7 May 2019 11: 40
            +1
            What you describe does not contradict my statement, moreover, your words confirm my statement. What is at the moment is "a ban on the transfer of land to private owners" and I'm talking about "restrictions \ rules \ conditions for the use of this piece of land." A couple of examples to explain the difference
            1) You can prohibit the construction of capital housing, and you can limit the minimum height of residential buildings. In the first case, you do not allow to build housing on the site you need, and in the second case, you force the other to create a stock of housing and increase the efficiency of land use, so that your other person does not need your land.
            2) You can prohibit building housing too close to a military facility (port), or you can allocate a reserve of land for the creation of a faster transport infrastructure so that people move further at the same time from home to work (port) so that your desired site becomes no longer needed by others persons.
            3) It is possible to prohibit the construction of a TV tower / wind farm on a hill, or you can impose the condition "in this area and in this direction, it is required to ensure the operation of the radar". In the second case, a private owner can build his own TV tower, provided that a military radar station is located on it, it is even more profitable for the military because of the increase in the real radio horizon of the radar.
            4) It is possible to prohibit the transfer of land to private individuals (for the shipyard), or it is possible to introduce the rule "only for industrial use, directly or indirectly related to the civil-military shipyard." In the second case, a private owner will be able to build a shipyard, but only a larger one in the future, suitable for the production / repair / maintenance of naval vessels.
            5) It is possible to prohibit the construction of the bridge, or to pay for the demolition of the constructed bridge, but it was possible to impose the restriction "requires the passage of pontoon cargo with height> = A and width> = B". In the second case, those who need a crossing will be able to build either an underground tunnel or a drawbridge, or a higher bridge.
  3. nafanal
    nafanal 6 May 2019 13: 07
    -1
    It’s interesting the girls are dancing .. And how is it with the centering .. It’s painfully tall and short .. Yes, I didn’t notice the jet propulsion ..
    1. Oquzyurd
      Oquzyurd 6 May 2019 13: 41
      +1
      "I did not notice the jet propulsion unit .." In the video 0.55 sec. They write that there is an auto balancer that straightens the roll while sailing.
      1. nafanal
        nafanal 6 May 2019 14: 05
        +1
        It’s all garbage .. I had the honor to serve in the GSVG .. By the way, do you know what it is? Mechvod BMP-1. During the exercises, I crossed the Elbe three times .. Once in a mess -1 I’m familiar with the device of the water cannon and the steering wheel, it’s easier than a steamed turnip. If you think that these bottlenecks are capable of effectively turning such a machine ... well, the flag is in your hands ... dead man ... What the hell is it for you .... I must say that goose dogs are not the best mover on the water
    2. donavi49
      donavi49 6 May 2019 13: 44
      +2
      Well, the most numerous and participating in the war marines know better. This case has been used since Vietnam. And no complaints.

      Member of all possible wars. From coups in Latin America to the Falklands, Iraq91, Yugoslavia, Iraq03.



      1. nafanal
        nafanal 6 May 2019 17: 17
        -1
        Well, Yes. Well, yes .. Laziness yourself to look for: and therefore the question .. In what operations this pepelats was involved
        1. donavi49
          donavi49 6 May 2019 17: 25
          +2
          In all the wars where the US Marines were + the Falklands were on the side of the Argentines (all of a sudden).




    3. orionvitt
      orionvitt 6 May 2019 14: 51
      +1
      Quote: Nathanael
      It’s too tall and short

      And what is his alignment? He sits in the water on the very tower. The excitement of more than two points, already snorkel needed.
  4. Karabas
    Karabas 6 May 2019 13: 09
    11 th
    Another iron caput. There is a question. What’s floating for them? Apparently by analogy with the desert ships, this will apparently be a desert cruiser. laughing
    1. KVU-NSVD
      KVU-NSVD 6 May 2019 13: 20
      +6
      Quote: Karabas
      There is a question. What’s floating for them?

      There's an answer . On the one to be used as a means of disembarkation from the Anadolu DVDKD under construction. A highly specialized limited order for a specific purpose.
      1. Karabas
        Karabas 6 May 2019 14: 04
        -4
        There's an answer . On the one to be used as a means of disembarkation from the Anadolu DVDKD under construction. A highly specialized limited order for a specific purpose.

        And the harp will not be small? Mattresses have already experienced similar landings in Portugal. laughing
        1. KVU-NSVD
          KVU-NSVD 6 May 2019 14: 33
          +3
          Quote: Karabas
          And the harp will not be small? Mattresses have already experienced similar landings in Portugal.
          Reply

          I can’t say anything about the performance characteristics of this unit, although visually of course the shed is on a shed on an disproportionate chassis. Immediately questions about survival, handling, patency, safe roll, cornering stability at high speed. But the Turks know better - that means the pluses of the unit probably outweighed the cons ... And as for the memorable shots with NATO equipment stuck right on the beach, then for me these are questions for the staff who were planning a landing. Their direct obligation is to know the capabilities of the soils at the landing site, the weather report at the time of landing and correlate with the capabilities of the landing technique, coupled with the training of the mechanical drives for such a landing ..
          1. ProkletyiPirat
            ProkletyiPirat 7 May 2019 02: 28
            +1
            Quote: KVU-NSVD
            I can not say anything about the performance characteristics of this unit

            TTX stands for tactically-specifications. got it? first TACTICS, and only then technology. And the tactics of these vehicles is landing from a ship into the sea in high seas, landing on the coast, and seizing a bridgehead sufficient for organizing the landing of ground forces. Therefore, these "cows" have armor and can swim, the rest, such as cross-country ability, controllability, etc. provides no tactical advantage.
        2. nafanal
          nafanal 6 May 2019 17: 21
          0
          Well, there’s mostly wheel equipment skidding ..
  5. Zaurbek
    Zaurbek 6 May 2019 14: 21
    0
    The Turks with design are all right! Our need to learn
    1. Karabas
      Karabas 6 May 2019 15: 02
      -5
      The Turks with design are all right! Our need to learn

      How to attach clay pots to the sides of the garbage container? laughing
      1. Zaurbek
        Zaurbek 6 May 2019 15: 57
        +3
        How to make a beautiful technical object that they want to buy.
        1. Karabas
          Karabas 6 May 2019 16: 09
          -3
          How to make a beautiful technical object that they want to buy.

          So here it is! And I’m racking my brains for what the pepelats. It turns out just beautiful. laughing
          1. Karabas
            Karabas 6 May 2019 17: 28
            -1
            Adherents of the Turkish sect of beauty and design diligently minus me, what a pity that it is not an esthetician. laughing
  6. MTR theme
    MTR theme 6 May 2019 14: 23
    10 th
    The armored personnel carrier is so good that it has been tested by time and war. No wonder the Japanese recently ordered it ... they create the Marines from scratch to capture the Kuril Islands
  7. SASHA OLD
    SASHA OLD 6 May 2019 14: 34
    +1
    on the one hand, the old proven (American) design, on the other ... are there really no newer good examples?
    I'm not special, just trying to reason.
    it is obvious that following the "old-proven" path is easier and cheaper
  8. orionvitt
    orionvitt 6 May 2019 14: 46
    -1
    protection against armor-piercing bullets of caliber 14,5 mm.
    The numbers were not mistaken. BTR-80, and the smaller armor-piercing bullets of smaller caliber, are flashed to fly. The Turks blurted out something, not even with aluminum armor. For all its merits, it will not replace full-fledged armor.
  9. Cowbra
    Cowbra 6 May 2019 16: 02
    0
    Next to our TCP, of course, looks dumb
  10. Never mind
    Never mind 6 May 2019 16: 59
    -2
    Very often it is written about Turkish weapons! I wonder what it would be. I would like to read about our soldiers on the eve of the Great Holiday!
  11. skazochnik
    skazochnik 6 May 2019 21: 36
    +2
    The grenade launcher's dream is all that comes to mind lol
    1. Polymer
      Polymer 7 May 2019 03: 33
      -1
      Yes, it’s hard not to get into it. And the side projections are just fragments of the wall, which can be broken only by a stone from a sling.