BTR-50P. By land and by water


"Combat buses." The BTR-50P armored personnel carrier has largely become a unique combat vehicle. In addition to the fact that this was the first domestic tracked armored personnel carrier, the BTR-50 was also floating. Here his pedigree fully affected. This model was created on the basis of light floating tank PT-76. In addition to the paratroopers, the APC could safely transport up to two tons of cargo by water, including mortars and artillery mounts of a caliber of up to 85 mm inclusive, and fire on the enemy from the gun could be conducted directly during transportation.


The history of the creation of the tracked floating armored personnel carrier BTR-50P


The tactical and technical assignment issued by GBTU immediately provided for the creation of two new combat vehicles - a light amphibious tank and an armored personnel carrier based on it with the maximum possible unification of design units and assemblies. The new Soviet armored personnel carrier was created jointly by the designers of VNII-100 (Leningrad), the Chelyabinsk Kirov Plant (ChKZ) and the Krasnoye Sormovo Plant, and the well-known Soviet tank designer Zh. Ya. Kotin carried out general management of the project. 15 of August 1949 of the year began work on the creation of new combat vehicles in the USSR, and the technical design of the new armored personnel carrier was already ready on September 1 of 1949 of the year. In the same year, design work to create a light amphibious tank and tracked armored personnel carrier was transferred to Chelyabinsk, where the projects received the designations “Object 740” (future PT-76) and “Object 750” (future armored personnel carrier-50P).

From the very beginning of the work, the Soviet designers were faced with the task of creating a tracked floating armored personnel carrier designed to transport personnel of motorized rifle units of the Soviet Army, as well as various military cargoes, including artillery pieces and light wheeled vehicles, under conditions of possible fire resistance from a likely enemy. Work on the tank and the armored personnel carrier was carried out in parallel, but the armored personnel carrier was created with some lag behind the schedule. This delay was justified by the development of a large number of design solutions, for example, a water-jet propulsion, first on a light floating tank PT-76. It was the successful tests of the PT-76 that inspired the designers the confidence that the work on the creation of the armored personnel carriers would be completed in the same successful manner.


BTR-50P

One of the requirements of the technical specifications when creating a new combat vehicle was the transportation of two tons of various cargoes up to the division artillery and the GAZ-69 SUV. While working on a solution to this problem, designers encountered difficulties in choosing a loading device. Two main options were considered: a crane installation with an electric drive and a winch with a drive from the main engine of an armored personnel carrier with loading on folding ramps. In the course of work, the option with a crane was abandoned due to the excessive design and operational complexity of this solution.

An interesting fact is that already during the tests of the new tracked armored personnel carrier, on their own initiative, the designers fired on land and afloat from the transported artillery systems: the anti-tank 57-mm gun ZIS-2 and even the 85-mm gun D-44. Carrying out such tests with technical assignments from the military was not provided, the only requirement was the transportation of divisional artillery. To the surprise of many, these firing were successful and did not lead to breakdowns in the chassis of the armored personnel carrier and any incidents. Moreover, the vehicle’s buoyancy margin turned out to be quite sufficient for firing from a transported gun without flooding or capsizing an armored personnel carrier, which only confirmed the very high amphibious capabilities of the new vehicles.


Light amphibious tank PT-76

The first prototype tracked armored personnel carrier was ready by the end of April 1950 of the year, from April 26 to June 11 of the same year, the APC was factory tested. The tests carried out allowed us to adjust the technical documentation for the new combat vehicle, in July two new prototypes of the “750 Object” were ready, the state tests of which were carried out in the second half of the 1950 year. Based on the results of state tests, the car was finalized once again, and in the third quarter of 1951, ChKZ submitted two more prototypes for testing, which passed the military test stage the following year. The military noted the insufficient design strength of the wave-reflecting shield, the unsatisfactory accuracy of the regular weapon battle - the large-caliber 12,7-mm DShK machine gun, as well as cases of spontaneous operation of fire fighting equipment. After eliminating all the shortcomings indicated by the military and finalizing the APCs, they passed control tests in the autumn of 1953, breaking thousands of kilometers of 1,5 altogether. In April of the following year, the new armored personnel carrier was officially adopted by the Soviet Army by order of the USSR Minister of Defense under the designation BTR-50P.

The new Soviet combat vehicle was unique in many of its characteristics and was a completely domestic development, which was created without regard to foreign models of such equipment. Moreover, the amphibious tank PT-76 with powerful artillery weapons, on the chassis of which the BTR-50P was created, was the only vehicle of its kind. In many ways, the creation of such equipment was helped by the extensive experience in the development of light amphibious tanks, which was accumulated in the USSR before the Second World War.

Technical features of the armored personnel carrier BTR-50P


The first Soviet tracked armored personnel carrier was a floating combat vehicle with bulletproof armor. The displacement body of the armored personnel carrier was made by welding from armored plates with a thickness of 4 to 10 mm. The combat weight of the BTR-50 did not exceed 14,2 tons. A distinctive feature of the combat vehicle was the location of the diesel engine along the longitudinal axis of the hull. For a new model of armored vehicles, Soviet designers chose the following layout scheme. In the front of the APC was the control compartment, in the middle part - the airborne compartment, in the stern - the engine-transmission compartment. The crew of the armored personnel carrier consisted of two people: the driver and the commander. The commander’s workplace was on the right, the driver’s driver was on the left. In addition, inside the hull in the landing compartment could accommodate 12 fighters. As much as possible, an armored personnel carrier could transport people of personnel or two tons of various military cargo, up to 20, through a water barrier, for example, an artillery gun along with a crew. Versions of the armored personnel carrier without a roof were equipped with a removable awning, which protected the landing from the effects of rainfall.


BTR-50P transports an artillery gun

BTR-50P got the chassis, transmission and power plant without changes from the PT-76 tank. The heart of the combat vehicle was the V-6PVG diesel engine, which developed maximum 240 horsepower. This power was enough to provide the tracked vehicle with a maximum speed of up to 45 km / h when driving on the highway and up to 10,2 km / h afloat. Cruising range was estimated in 240-260 km (on the highway). The new armored personnel carrier, as well as the light tank PT-76, was distinguished by high mobility and maneuverability characteristics, had a buoyancy reserve, good maneuverability and stability. It is for this reason that the new equipment came into service not only motorized rifle units, but also units of the marine corps. In addition to water bodies, the BTR-50 easily overcame obstacles in the form of ditches and trenches up to 2,8 meter wide and vertical walls 1,1 meter high.

In the aft part of the car, on the roof of the engine-transmission compartment, the designers placed folding ramps for loading artillery guns and mortars (the BTR-50P could transport the 120-mm mortar, 57-mm, 76-mm or 85-mm artillery), as well as all-wheel drive GAZ-67 or GAZ-69. For transporting weapons, the BTR was specially equipped with a loading device, which consisted of. in addition to folding ramps, from a powerful winch with a pulling force at the level of 1500 kgf.

BTR-50P. By land and by water

Despite the fact that a large-caliber machine gun DShK was installed on the prototypes during the tests, armored personnel carriers went into the series either without full-time armament or with the 7,62-mm SGMB machine gun, created on the basis of the SG-43 machine gun. The second attempt to arm the war machine with a large-caliber weapons was already undertaken in the year 1956. The prototype BTR-50PA was armed with an 14,5-mm KPVT machine gun, which, as before, was tried to be mounted on a turret with an armored back on the hatch of the BTR commander. Despite the efforts of the designers, this version of the BTR-50 with increased firepower did not reach the stage of adoption.

Upgrade Options


Already in 1959, the mass production of the tracked armored personnel carrier, which received the designation BTR-50PK, was launched into serial production. The main difference of this model was the presence of a roof, which covered the entire landing compartment. For landing and landing in the roof, three separate hatches were designed. It is worth noting that the roof in 1959 was equipped with all available Soviet armored personnel carriers, this also applied to wheeled vehicles - BTR-40 and BTR-152. The Soviet military took into account the experience of urban battles in Hungary in the 1956 year, when paratroopers were vulnerable to fire from the upper floors of buildings, in addition, it was easy to throw fuel bottles or grenades into the body. In addition to the protective function, the roof above the airborne compartment improved the already very good amphibious properties of the armored personnel carrier, allowing you to swim even with slight excitement, the water simply did not get inside the car.


BTR-50PC Polish People's Army

The BTR-50PU and BTR-50PN command-and-staff vehicles also became quite widespread; the production of the first model in Volgograd was launched in 1958. Such a machine could transport up to 10 people, and a desk was set up in the headquarters for working with cards and documents. Also a distinctive feature of the command post vehicle was the presence of a complex of three radio stations P-112, P-113 and P-105. Three four-meter antennas, one 10-tee and one 11-meter antenna became the standard equipment of the combat vehicle. In the process of modernizing machines, the composition of equipment and communications located inside was changing.

Already in the 1970-ies, some of the first serial BTR-50P were converted into technical assistance vehicles (MTP). Such armored vehicles were used by motorized rifle units that received new BMP-1 infantry fighting vehicles. In the modernized armored personnel carriers, instead of the airborne landing, there was an industrial compartment with an armored roof. The height of the compartment was increased, which allowed the repairmen to work at full height. Work tools were transported in the production department, equipment and devices for repair and maintenance of BMP-1 were installed, and there were funds for evacuating the infantry fighting vehicle. And for the installation and installation on the BMP-1 of various components and assemblies on the MTP, a jib crane was placed.


MTP Model

In total, during the serial production from 1954 to 1970, a year in the USSR it was possible to assemble up to 6500 armored personnel carriers BTR-50 of various modifications. This technique remained in service with the Soviet Army until the end of the USSR. Some of these armored personnel carriers can still be stored. At the same time, there is interest in such machines now. For example, the Kharkov plant named after Malyshev still offers options for the modernization of this armored personnel carrier with the installation of new 400 horsepower engines, heavy machine guns, a new gearbox and modified chassis components. The Ukrainian company hopes that the upgraded BTR-50 will be able to interest potential customers from Africa and Asia.
Ctrl Enter

Noticed a mistake Highlight text and press. Ctrl + Enter

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

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Theodore 22 November 2019 18: 08 New
    • 6
    • 0
    +6
    An irreplaceable pepelats!
    1. volodimer 23 November 2019 16: 30 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      Just for understanding ... http://www.yaplakal.com/forum3/topic2035776.html, Dear Sergey, is that you too? Recently, there are articles similar to those of VO, for example, Roman about the battle of Bengal and a tanker with Japanese raiders (https://topwar.ru/164649-bogi-ljubjat-otvazhnyh.html), but there were more differences. If you are engaged in additional education, then this is not bad. If some "authors" overflow material, then ...
      Best regards hi !
  2. The leader of the Redskins 22 November 2019 18: 16 New
    • 10
    • 1
    +9
    In our school, in the park, there was one such. They climbed into it. Oh and the "gym", compared with the tank!))) Thanks for the article!
  3. Aaron Zawi 22 November 2019 18: 27 New
    • 21
    • 2
    +19
    We used all BTR-50, up to their complete wear. Loved the car.
    1. Zeev Zeev 22 November 2019 21: 13 New
      • 7
      • 2
      +5
      We used the BTR-50P and their Czech version of the OT-62 TOPAS for five years, from 1969 to 1974, together with the PT-76 as part of the Dov Lavan unit, intended for amphibious sabotage. In 1974, part was disbanded, the equipment was put into storage. In 1982, the BTR-50s were transferred to the South Lebanese Army.
  4. Alexga 22 November 2019 20: 51 New
    • 6
    • 0
    +6
    I found in the tank regiments of the tank divisions BRT-50PUM. They were in service before the arrival of the R-142n. These machines were equipped with topographic sensors. And in the repair it was generally a song.
  5. Pavel57 22 November 2019 21: 00 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    One could say about the licensed release and participation in wars.
  6. Alf
    Alf 22 November 2019 21: 11 New
    • 9
    • 0
    +9
    Oddly enough, perhaps the most little-known Soviet armored personnel carrier.
    I had something incomprehensible, only many years later I recognized the BTR-50 in it.
  7. Evil echo 22 November 2019 21: 26 New
    • 4
    • 0
    +4
    Ancestors were able to create, deadlines are just class.
  8. faterdom 22 November 2019 22: 19 New
    • 28
    • 1
    +27
    Work on the creation of new combat vehicles in the USSR began on August 15, 1949, and the technical design of the new armored personnel carrier was ready on September 1, 1949.

    The first prototype tracked armored personnel carrier was ready by the end of April 1950, from April 26 to June 11 of the same year, the APC was factory tested. The tests conducted allowed us to adjust the technical documentation for the new combat vehicle. In July, two new prototypes of the Object 750 were ready, the state tests of which were carried out in the second half of 1950. According to the results of state tests, the car was finalized once again, and in the third quarter of 1951, the ChKZ submitted two more prototypes for testing, which the next year passed the military test stage.

    I want to pay attention to the timing!
    And the current "effective managers" could play such a nocturne on flutes of drainpipes?
    The answer is self-evident.
    And the ancestors in the conditions of the economy and industry that were still destroyed, could do so. And they created a masterpiece.
    I was dealing with the BTR-50PUM. The first memory - as a lieutenant I accept the motley technique of platoon in the battalion of communications. Previously, I saw such a crocodile only in pictures in a book, junk in it according to the inventory — a thick book with an enumeration; another leiteha, a classmate, climbed up to curious me (he took another platoon). And so he pressed something like that, some shot rang out inside this tank and something hissed ominously loudly! We were like a zigzag of lightning, greased with fat, instantly evaporated through the top hatch, and it hissed - and fell silent ... Nothing exploded and we experienced great relief. They later found out that it was an emergency fire extinguishing system triggered by a squib ...
    Then, a year later, on the basis of armored vehicles, I received as many as 22 such PUMs for two MSDs, and all the ensigns of this base, headed by the chief engineer, tried to cheat me and not fulfill my wishes about their acquisition. The dispute had a particularly hot stage when it was already immersed on the railway platform, when they justifiably nodded to me that someone would pay for a simple platform, and I did not sign acts until they completed everything that the inventory should contain. And the Ural truck darted, either a compass separately, then an additional tank for diesel fuel, then a gas unit instead of a wedged one. And the apotheosis is three drain plugs from the bottom, similar to plugs from barrels. They tried to convince me that “they were everywhere in bulk”, to which I, already experienced, had almost drowned GTT in the swamp because of such a trifle (they were usually unscrewed by mechanical water so that rain water spontaneously spilled down) answered: “Well, take it, time in bulk. " They brought it.
    Then there were adventures with a train ride with endless sortings from the hills (once shibanuli so that a fighter in a heat-sink caught a hot potbelly stove nailed to the floor).
    And in the final, all the hassle was at home at the unloading with the fact that we didn’t have a trailer, and tracked vehicles were forbidden to use public roads with railroad crossings. Zampotech had to organize the passage of the convoy through the surrounding villages in a roundabout way, it was in the darkness of late November, so the villagers, when they were able to see nearby, what kind of convoy of vehicles with one headlight they were sincerely shocked! No, the fences that our soldiers threw at them we rebuilt them the next day, in the form of a cleanup. But the event for them was then a long subject of pride and discussion (who didn’t know then there were two TV programs, of which one was more or less caught there, it worked until 23 o’clock, so we did a lot of hyping, as the current generation would put it).
    1. Private-K 24 November 2019 16: 44 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      There is an excellent story called “There is such a word DShB ...” There, with humor, it is told how the seconded starley received, according to the inventory, an armored truck on a rembase. In the morning he came and begins ... something is missing. Everything says, I do not accept, look. And ... leaves. Comes only the next day. And again. I took a month like that.

      GT-T ... Does that mean you served in one of the “snow-swamp” divisions in Karelia or the Far East? Were they in your regimental company?
      1. faterdom 30 November 2019 19: 38 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        77 MSD Arkhangelsk, these PUMs were used for divisional OBS and the communication companies of all regiments were divided into two divisions (11 each). I also had a radio station R-137B (VHF medium power) on such a tank.
  9. Potter 22 November 2019 23: 19 New
    • 2
    • 0
    +2
    The history of creation is not very fully disclosed - namely, the design and construction of prototype tanks and armored personnel carriers at the Krasnoye Sormovo plant. But the first Sormovsky samples of both the floating R-39 tank and the B-40 RTR turned out to be unsuccessful, and it was then that they brought ChKZ to work with the transfer of all the materials of the Sormans to it. Those involved in the development of unsuccessful machines (the director of the Sormovsky plant and the chief designer) were dismissed and roughly punished.
  10. Saxahorse 23 November 2019 00: 10 New
    • 3
    • 10
    -7
    A curious design but in fact not an ice. The layout is completely stupid for the conveyor; loading / unloading is extremely inconvenient. In general, the only plus is that he was the first in the Soviet army.

    However, there is also a huge minus in its popularity .. It seems that the obvious minuses and inconveniences of the ancient BTR-50 did not reach today's specialists .. Therefore, we suddenly see the same ancient and unsuccessful layout at the parades, but under new names! It turns out that if you call a hopelessly outdated trough a Shell, it immediately becomes a pleasant novelty, for this it seems even give prizes ..
    1. Siberian54 23 November 2019 04: 43 New
      • 1
      • 1
      0
      And why not repeat the successful outer shell under modern conditions
      1. The comment was deleted.
        1. prodi 23 November 2019 14: 03 New
          • 1
          • 0
          +1
          And even with such an arrangement, well, wasn’t it possible to flip the top hatches to the sides with overhang to increase their armoring, instead of moronic loopholes?
    2. Bad_gr 23 November 2019 19: 03 New
      • 1
      • 1
      0
      Quote: Saxahorse
      However, there is also a huge minus in its popularity .. It seems that the obvious minuses and inconveniences of the ancient BTR-50 did not reach today's specialists ..

      And to assume that the advantages of such a layout with a margin interrupt all the disadvantages - not an option?
      From a room sofa is more visible than to people who operate it?
      1. Saxahorse 23 November 2019 20: 43 New
        • 2
        • 2
        0
        Quote: Bad_gr
        And to assume that the advantages of such a layout with a margin interrupt all the disadvantages - not an option?

        Why didn’t I notice that someone called at least one plus of such an arrangement for the landing ... Maybe at least you are tense and call me?

        Of the Soviet transporters, the best is definitely MT-LB. BMP-1, BMP-2 are also much more adequate in layout. But the BTR-50 (and today's Shell) is an obvious primitive.
        1. Bad_gr 23 November 2019 23: 13 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          Quote: Saxahorse
          Why didn’t I notice that someone called at least one plus of such an arrangement for the landing ... Maybe at least you are tense and call me?

          The rear-engine scheme allows you to well strengthen the forehead of the car. For example, BMP-3 frontal armor consists of two layers of armor and one of aluminum armor, which allows you to hold the impact of a 30 mm gun. Also, BMP-3 on the water does not bury its nose regardless of load, in contrast to the same BMP-1-2. The landing party, and in the case of BMP-3, BMD-4 and weapons, are located in the center of the vehicle, in the most comfortable place, unlike the BMP-1-2, where the landing is located at the end of the swing. In my opinion, it’s better to go for hours with comfort and for a second it’s not so convenient to land (land), than vice versa.
          And notice, while the military ordered the equipment - this arrangement prevailed. As soon as the "effective managers" arrived, the order went according to the Western model, with doors and an assault in the ass.
          1. Saxahorse 24 November 2019 18: 42 New
            • 0
            • 2
            -2
            Quote: Bad_gr
            The rear-engine scheme allows you to well strengthen the forehead of the car. For example, BMP-3 frontal armor consists of two layers ..

            A completely unsuccessful example. The front-engine layout makes it possible to improve the landing defense by almost an order of magnitude. Two to three meters of components and assemblies are excellent protection against cumulative, not counting even the armor itself.

            BMP-3 is generally horror-horror. Object 688M was created as a light floating tank, to replace the PT-76. In the 90s, a contract with the Arabs turned up and the tank was whipped up into a BMP. The result was a frankly miserable ersatz completely ignoring the main function of the infantry fighting vehicle - a quick and convenient landing. Yes, you yourself look at the layout scheme of the landing in the BMP-3 .. The front two paratroopers are clearly written off in advance, it will land through the front hatches under fire and it is impossible without losses. The rest, too .. On all fours the landing will take three times as much time, not to mention the possible losses during the crawl through the engine.

            Quote: Bad_gr
            And notice, while the military ordered the equipment - this arrangement prevailed.

            Everything is exactly the opposite. In the case of the BTR-50, the military was simply handed over what the engineers did, again whip up the tank configuration they were used to. It is the military who insistently demand the landing ramp. And literally after some 40 years, finally at Kurganets and Dragun this ramp appeared. But .. But they decided not to put them into production, but continued to sculpt an ersatz called BMP-3.

            Nobody in fact is interested in the opinion of the military. Serious people master the loot. And the military, that they poke on that and have to fight.
            1. Bad_gr 24 November 2019 20: 14 New
              • 0
              • 0
              0
              Quote: Saxahorse
              .... Two to three meters of components and assemblies excellent protection against cumulative, not counting the armor itself.

              This engine is a significant protection in a fighter of times of war in comparison with duralumin skin. Given that some types of pistols shoot through the engine block through - what kind of protection are you talking about? gearbox - wherever it goes, there are continuous gears, but what size and to what height does it cover the fighting compartment? As a result: a heavy motor block in the nose does not make it possible to put a normal armor plate, and one that can be put powerful cannot be, and will be shot through with the subsequent failure of the motor. A motionless BMP on the battlefield will not last long.
              Quote: Saxahorse
              In the 90s, a contract with the Arabs turned up and the tank was whipped up into a BMP. The result was a frankly miserable ersatz completely ignoring the main function of the infantry fighting vehicle

              I read a completely different story about the creation of this machine:
              for infantry and airborne forces decided to create a single machine. But it didn’t work out (for the Airborne Forces it’s large). Therefore, they created separately (BMD-4) for the landing, then the landing vehicle was taken from Volgograd and the production was transferred to Chelyabinsk citizens, who more unified it (BMD-4M) with BMP-3.
              In general - the Arabs have nothing to do with the creation of these machines.

              Left BMP-3, right BMD-4m
              Quote: Saxahorse
              But they decided not to launch them in production, but continued to sculpt an ersatz called BMP-3. Nobody in fact is interested in the opinion of the military.

              In my opinion, the opposite: Serdyukovskaya clowning ended, and returned to the layout tested in battles.
            2. militarist63 25 November 2019 17: 53 New
              • 2
              • 0
              +2
              BMP-3 is generally horror-horror. Object 688M was created as a light floating tank, to replace the PT-76. In the 90s, a contract with the Arabs turned up and the tank was whipped up into a BMP.
              What are you talking about! And in what kind of anal you have read such a thing ?! I was in Kurgan in the mid-80s (in 1985), received a BMP-2K batch at the Lenin KMZ and was detained there for a month ... Therefore, then I had a lot of time to talk with the military representative at the BMP plant -3 and see her ... There were already sure rumors about this car in the army (I was not the only one to go to the factory for products ...) ... At this time (in 1985 !!!) BMP prototypes -3 (and not some PT with the name ob-t 688) factory tests were in full swing, and I saw her personally! In the late 80s, the BMP-3 was already adopted and began to enter the army! What kind of alteration of a tank in a BMP for Arabs in the 90s you are broadcasting here! Read and relay less shnya less! For the UAE tender in the 90s, BMP-3 was already adopted by the USSR Armed Forces and was mass-produced at KMZ .... and only then there was that tender (really in the 90s) that we won !!!
              And as for the “front-engine layout”, so you know, the first requirement of the military (MO) to develop a new BMP (to replace the BMP-2 (1)) was to increase the reservation ... At the same time, the frontal armor had to withstand the direct hit of small-caliber shells guns !!! In this situation, when the armor is not weak "in the forehead", and even the engine compartment in front, the prospect of swimming with such a product would be a booty to the top - to the bottom! sad So we made such a decision to stabilize the weight ... and really, we applied the developments on vol.688 ...
              1. Saxahorse 26 November 2019 00: 04 New
                • 0
                • 1
                -1
                Quote: militarist63
                At this time (in 1985 !!!), the BMP-3 prototypes (and not some sort of tank with the name ob-688) were undergoing factory tests at full speed, and I saw it personally! In the late 80s, the BMP-3 was already adopted and began to enter the army!

                Sorry, but the first 10 pieces of "Objects 688M" were transferred for trial operation on December 31, 1986, at 22.30 h. smile , in the Belarusian military district. If you saw something in 1985 then this was not called BMP-3. Where does the conversation about the floating tank come from? Yes, everything is from there:
                To develop a future BMP, a new creative team of specialists was organized at SKB KMZ, headed by a leading engineer V.A. Zinoviev. The group included designers who already had experience in the development of combat tracked vehicles during the development work to create a new light amphibious tank (object 685) in 1974-1975, as well as young engineers - graduates of the department of tracked vehicles (GM) of the Kurgan Machine-Building Institute. The development, creation, testing and refinement of the BMP-3 took a total of almost 15 years.


                By the way, it was precisely Zinoviev who headed the layout department in the new group.
                When developing the chassis of the machine, a scientific and technical reserve was used, created during the joint work of SKB KMZ and VNIITransmash on a new floating tank. This has reduced the development time of a promising BMP.


                For the first time, this car was publicly called the BMP-3 at the May 1990 parade. By that time, as many as 35 cars had already been produced. All in trial operation. The Arabs saw her at the parade and agreed to purchase in 1991. And only then really serial production began.

                Claims to the car appeared immediately. It is easy to notice that the brave engineers did the tank and it turned out, everyone admires its firepower, but the main task of the BMP - the landing, they just did not give a damn.
                Once again I recommend, look at the layout of the landing. Inside allegedly 5 + 2 paratroopers.

                It is easy to see that the front two paratroopers will not be able to leave the car under fire.
                1. Saxahorse 26 November 2019 00: 09 New
                  • 0
                  • 1
                  -1
                  Quote: Saxahorse
                  It is easy to see that the front two paratroopers will not be able to leave the car under fire.

                  Generally speaking, the main landing force will not be able to leave the car without losses either:

                  You see that the infantry is forced to flee on the top with almost no protection? And after that they try to claim that this car is a good BMP !?

                  For some reason, the Chinese did not have such problems. They licensed our really good combat module, but the layout of the ZBD-04 did completely their own. (like ours of the later Dragoon) And they had no unsolvable problems with swimming. As a result, China has an adequate infantry fighting vehicle in its tank troops, but for some reason we do not!
                2. militarist63 26 November 2019 04: 47 New
                  • 2
                  • 0
                  +2
                  Sorry, but the first 10 pieces of "Objects 688M" were transferred for trial operation on December 31, 1986, at 22.30 h. smile, in the Belarusian military district. If you saw something in 1985 then this was not called BMP-3.
                  Dear! You yourself have denied yourself! They themselves wrote that already in 1986 (even at the end of it) they transferred to the BVI for trial operation! laughing laughing laughing I want to tell you, "a great specialist," that before a new model of BT is transferred to the troops "for trial operation" this equipment goes through a long process of factory testing! Those. you yourself admitted that in 1986 the BMP-3 (although you called it 688M) was already ready! Not a prototype, but as many as 10 copies issued to the troops! laughing At the same time, this does not mean that only 10 were produced! They handed over new ones, from the assembly line ... And how many more ... those that were still in extreme sports drove through the valleys, but along the hills ... And so you know, before this transfer to BVI, BMP-3 in 1984 in the year passed sea trials in Kubinka, then in 1985 in the mountains of Armenia, then in TurkVO (in the Turkmen desert and mountains of Tajikistan). And there were also tests at the Opuk training ground (this is in the Crimea, if you do not know), where sea trials were conducted afloat and firing from this position ... I don’t know who you are by profession, but I am an officer and in those days are my 22 years old service, I’m a military contemporary of those events. Therefore, I do not need to vtyuhivat what you read somewhere on the Internet, "expert"! And do not tell me what and what was called when I was at the factory! I came into direct contact with this, and I don’t know from anyone’s publications ... Do you think the military representative at the plant knows what and what is called? So, in communication with him (and we talked with him then for a month, the acceptance of my cars was tied to him) about the BMP-3 and when he showed it to me, he called it like BMP-3, and not some "object 688M" !!!! If you don’t know who the “military representative” is, I explain: The military representative is the customer’s representative (military representative), i.e. Ministry of Defense. Military missions at defense industry enterprises had the task of monitoring product quality and accepting it before being sent to the troops ... In addition, as I wrote above, there was talk specifically about the BMP-3 (and not some object ...) in the troops and until 1985 ... One of the officers went to Kurgan for the previous batch of BMP ... My colleague (officer) in the summer of 1986 witnessed BMP-3 tests in Turkmenistan in the summer ... and called her exactly so, and not somehow else! Those. In 1985-86, they already knew about this car, as well as about BMP-3, and I witnessed this, and here you are pushing something into me! negative
                  For the first time, this vehicle was publicly called the BMP-3 at the May 1990 parade. By that time, already 35 vehicles had been produced.
                  laughing laughing negative So it to you, in plain clothes publicly called ...! laughing But we knew for a long time! ... But with the number, sir, do not distort! It was PREPARED FOR THE PARADE 35 units (and not pieces) and this does not mean that they were all released! In particular, just before that (in April 1990), officers of our regiment (in the TurKVO) were at the training camp at the Chirchik training ground. There (at the training ground) were BMP-3s ... If you are not in the know, then the preparation for the Moscow parades is a very long process and it was too late to send these to the capital for preparation! Therefore, it seems to me that even if they used some BMP-3s from the troops, then from the Moscow garrison (Tamanskaya and Kantemirovskaya divisions, Moscow IWECU, courses "Shot"), and even drove from the factory ...., and those that they went into the troops of other districts, they weren’t touched (for example, those 10 that were in the BVI) ... But they could have driven the entire front calculation from the plant, which is more likely!
                  By the way, about your ironies about the number of released and other "mass production" ... If you do not know, it was the time of the Gorbachev pererayski, when, for example, “Buran” and a lot of other promising were buried! .....
                  It is easy to notice that the brave engineers did the tank and it turned out that everyone admires its firepower, but the main task of the BMP is landing, they just didn’t give a damn .........
                  It is easy to see that the front two paratroopers will not be able to leave the car under fire.
                  If you are not in the know, in BMP-2 the senior shooter (also from the landing party) sits behind the mech. Water and leaves the car through the top hatch too! Maybe the BMP-2 is also a tank ?! wink
                3. militarist63 26 November 2019 14: 04 New
                  • 1
                  • 0
                  +1
                  And more about your type of argument:
                  10 pieces of "Objects 688M" were transferred for trial operation on December 31, 1986, at 22.30 h. smile, in the Belarusian military district. If you saw something in 1985 then this was not called BMP-3.
                  Only a completely illiterate person can refer to this in matters of military equipment and weapons, who did not exploit or maintain this equipment !!! smile The names "object .....", "Product ..." which do not disclose (classify) the true name and purpose of the BTT model and weapons, as a rule, were used in parallel with open names, so that the adversary would not have guessed ... There were many technical literature using these hidden names, moreover, they were imposed (with such names) not during the development of technology, but when it was already in full swing in the army. These names could be used in correspondence .... Here you are for general development:

                  The presented facilities have been adopted for many years and have been mass-produced! Object 434, it is T-64A adopted for service in 1969, and the little book was printed already in 1986 !!! For more than 15 years, this object was known as the T-64A! And there was already literature where where the object was called and how T-64A ... Object 676, it was also adopted by the BRM-1K in 1972, and since then the machine has been in the army under the name BRM-1K Korshun! And such a little book was printed in 1982 !!! Just, unlike you, I know this "kitchen" not from the Internet, but from life! Since I operated the BTT (along with subordinate personnel) I received, transmitted ... Accordingly, it was in my account (and I was financially responsible for it) .... and my cabinets were overwhelmed with this documentation!
                  1. Saxahorse 26 November 2019 23: 33 New
                    • 0
                    • 1
                    -1
                    Quote: militarist63
                    The names "object .....", "Product ..." which do not disclose (classify) the true name and purpose of the BTT model and weapons, as a rule, were used in parallel with open names,

                    Dear, you spent two extensive comments on the title dispute, but why didn’t you say anything in essence?

                    The development, creation, testing and refinement of the BMP-3 took a total of almost 15 years.

                    This phrase came from the memories of engineers. In 1977 started, in 1978 the chassis went, after 15 years in 1992 the car went into series. If you do not agree, please, if not monthly, at least annual production volumes of this machine for these 15 years. From 1978 to 1992.

                    Well, let me remind you of the main thing. At first glance it can be seen that the landing is simply disgusting. If a machine cannot provide a landing without losses, how can it be called a good IFV? Erzats he is ersatz. A light tank whipped up adapted for transporting half of the compartment.

                    Landing is the main, obvious to everyone, and even more so military, a huge problem. Can you argue with reason?
                    1. militarist63 27 November 2019 01: 23 New
                      • 1
                      • 1
                      0
                      Well, let me remind you of the main thing. At first glance it can be seen that the landing is simply disgusting. If a machine cannot provide a landing without losses, how can it be called a good IFV? Erzats he is ersatz. A light tank whipped up adapted for transporting half of the compartment.
                      Sir, once again you prove that you are far from military subjects! Your avatar is very suitable for you here! lol Discuss something closer to your specialty or play tanks! laughing
                    2. militarist63 27 November 2019 01: 41 New
                      • 0
                      • 1
                      -1
                      Landing is the main, obvious to everyone, and even more so military, a huge problem. Can you argue with reason?
                      Did you feel this on yourself? Served on these machines, or build hypothetical assumptions ?! wink
                    3. Bad_gr 27 November 2019 14: 20 New
                      • 1
                      • 0
                      +1
                      Quote: Saxahorse
                      Landing is the main, obvious to everyone, and even more so military, a huge problem.

                      The armored hatch during the landing almost completely covers the fighter from the flank. A tower covers it in front. Landing takes seconds.

                      And then, the fighter is next to the BMP, as if he had landed through the aft doors.
                      In general, the paratrooper spends most of his time either inside the infantry fighting vehicle - under the cover of armor (which is more rationally distributed among vehicles with the rear engine) or next to the infantry fighting vehicle (and it doesn’t matter which hatch he jumped to the ground from).
                      1. Saxahorse 27 November 2019 23: 08 New
                        • 0
                        • 0
                        0
                        Quote: Bad_gr
                        The armored hatch during the landing almost completely covers the fighter from the flank. A tower covers it in front. Landing takes seconds.

                        And you photograph a little higher, in my comment you bothered to look? It clearly shows that the run-out paratrooper from the front corners is almost completely open.

                        Seconds speak for landing? But nothing that this is just a second of the first fire contact, the start of the battle. In one second, each enemy AK-74 makes about 10 shots. And the enemy squad is already deployed and hidden. And our infantry there is its fifth point, on the roof sparkles. One by one.

                        BMPs are made for infantry, and not vice versa. For such cars must be punished!
                      2. Bad_gr 28 November 2019 14: 17 New
                        • 0
                        • 1
                        -1
                        Quote: Saxahorse
                        BMPs are made for infantry, and not vice versa. For such cars must be punished!

                        Are you in BMP-1-2 on rough terrain in the troop compartment?
                        And how do they (BMP-1-2) behave on water with an underloaded compartment?
                        For 200-300 meters, will you be able to get from the machine into a half-growth figure, which flickered on moving vehicles for 2-3 seconds (in the interval between the turret and armored shields)?
                      3. Saxahorse 28 November 2019 22: 11 New
                        • 0
                        • 0
                        0
                        Quote: Bad_gr
                        For 200-300 meters you can get from the machine into a half-growth figure,

                        Can't you? What was 2 UUS?
                        Shooting exercises
                        .. 2 UUS
                        Shooting from a place on an emerging target from various positions
                        Target: attacking infantry group - two arrows, belt figures (target number 7) appear twice
                        Range to goals, m:
                        7,62 mm (5,45 mm) automatic 300-400 m
                        Ammo Amount:
                        - for the machine gun and light machine gun, machine gun PC - 24, of which 6 - with tracer bullets;
                        Evaluation:
                        “Excellent” - hit both targets in each show;
                        “Good” - hit 3 targets in two shows;
                        “Satisfactory” - hit 2 targets in two shows.
                      4. Bad_gr 28 November 2019 23: 05 New
                        • 1
                        • 0
                        +1
                        Quote: Saxahorse

                        Quote: Bad_gr
                        For 200-300 meters you can get from the machine into a half-growth figure,

                        Quote: Saxahorse
                        Can't you? What was 2 UUS?

                        Hardly. By profession, I was a mechanic driver of a medium tank + 2 years working in Afghanistan (1983-85), where I was most likely a target, and not a shooter (especially the first year when I almost climbed out of business trips).
                        But back to the topic. Shooting aiming when they shoot back at you is not the same thing when shooting at targets.
                        I'm in a cap
                      5. Saxahorse 28 November 2019 23: 40 New
                        • 0
                        • 0
                        0
                        Quote: Bad_gr
                        But back to the topic. Shooting aiming when they shoot back at you is not the same thing when shooting at targets.

                        Of course. That is why the fired soldiers differ from recruits, and over time they begin to shoot aiming. And not one or two fighters will shoot, but at least a squad.

                        Only our topic is completely different. It is unacceptable to create cars that deliberately expose soldiers to fire. Moreover, there are plenty of normal examples, and BMP-1 and BTR-80 completely covered the landing with their hull. Yes, and M113 was in every TV, what a ramp they could not know.

                        Even with the BMP-2, this rot began, and for the same reason. The new gun increased the turret, the landing compartment decreased, and the new landing gear was laziness or lack of time. Once a ride, they wrote off one mentally, so the next time the BMP-3 generally spat on the landing. This should not be allowed.
  • militarist63 23 November 2019 01: 30 New
    • 2
    • 0
    +2
    The crew of the armored personnel carrier consisted of two people: the driver and the commander. The commander’s workplace was on the right, the driver’s driver was on the left.

    Comrade author, learn the materiel! Or, at least, consider your own photos! For example, a parade of Poles! The commander’s position, on the contrary, is on the port side and there is his hatch, and the driver is sitting to the right of the commander and in the center of the control compartment! On later models, a niche appeared in the control department on the starboard side of the navigator, to the right of the mechanic ... These are exactly the "BTR-50PK of the Polish People’s Army" presented in the photo.
  • phair 23 November 2019 11: 45 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    EEE ... I'm from Primorye. When it passed. Over your head. A very small female organ of disengagement ...
  • alex967 23 November 2019 18: 25 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    We had a battalion in our battalion.
    1. Sergey Sfiedu 23 November 2019 20: 31 New
      • 1
      • 1
      0
      Well, the "BTR-50PK of the Polish People's Army" is most likely the OT-62 TOPAS of Czechoslovak production. And I saw BTR-50PK and BTR-50PUM in the part where the training took place, back in the mid 80s.
  • Kanaris 24 November 2019 12: 36 New
    • 3
    • 0
    +3
    At the end of college in 1972. got into the SME of the tank division in the Central Army Forces. BTR-50p (with a tarpaulin top) was used as the main equipment on the armament of the motorized rifle battalions. As a vehicle has no equal. There is simply nothing to break there. The B-6 engine is half of the tank. There are no planetary mechanisms turning, for turning and braking - onboard friction clutches. BMP-1 is slightly inferior in acceleration dynamics, but the BTR-50's suspension is stiffer. But afloat will surpass all known BTR and BMP. A year later, in 1973, the regiment was rearmament on BMP-1 Czechoslovak production.
  • Private-K 24 November 2019 17: 09 New
    • 2
    • 0
    +2
    Correction: BTR-50s were never in service with the USSR Marine Corps. (Except KShM and UR-67 options). The Marine Corps asked - they suited her very much - but, for some reason, they did not. But the Polish naval airborne division was precisely on the BTR-50.
    1. Jarserge 27 December 2019 19: 49 New
      • 0
      • 1
      -1
      They were also used as coast guard units by the Polish Army. Used OT-62 TOPAS. The machine is highly modernized, replacing the engine, transmission and weapons. As a result, instead of 44 km per hour, it gave out 70, and the tower from the BTR-50PB with a 14.5 mm Vladimirov machine gun
  • Micfoster 24 November 2019 17: 19 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    Good car, in 1991 in the winter we went to the training ground. It raced along the snowy virgin lands and along tank roads, several times fell into the pits and jumped out, in the cabin the soldiers rode like peas in a bank. People had fun like on a carousel in childhood.
  • Jarserge 27 December 2019 19: 45 New
    • 0
    • 1
    -1
    He served in the Far East on the BTR-50. The car is great. If they were modernized, such as an increase in engine power, replacement of the transmission, the speed would accordingly increase. But the experience of the Czechs with the Poles is not a decree for us. As a result, the floating, passable car lived out its life in parts with a shortage of spare parts. I believe the potential was not used to the end.
  • Xomaik 15 February 2020 10: 56 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    This armored personnel carrier was an amphibian.