Military Review

The Airborne Forces will receive a buggy based on the latest Arrow armored car: the pros and cons of the new technology

39
The Airborne Forces will receive a buggy based on the latest Arrow armored car: the pros and cons of the new technology

Airborne divisions will soon receive a new high-speed buggy, which is being developed on the basis of the latest Arrow family of armored cars. The commander of the Airborne Forces, Colonel-General Andrei Serdyukov, spoke about this in an interview with the Krasnaya Zvezda newspaper.


According to the commander, it is planned to equip new "light-type" airborne units with new buggies. The need to equip the Airborne Forces with light buggies was confirmed during the Center-2019 exercises.

Work is underway to create a light buggy "Strela". The mobility characteristics of this model are unique. The maximum possible travel speed is 155 km per hour. Currently, a whole family of such vehicles has been developed that can be used for various purposes, including for mounting weapons.

- said Serdyukov, without specifying when the equipment is expected to arrive in the unit.

For our part, we note that the possibility of using light vehicles, including buggies, has been discussed by the Airborne Forces for a long time. The prospects for using such equipment in special forces are good. This technique is really light and can both be dropped from military transport aircraft and transported by helicopters, which is important for the Airborne Forces.

With its "lightness" and lack of booking, buggies can and carry different weapons depending on the tasks assigned. No one is going to send these vehicles to the front line, but as a reconnaissance tool that significantly increases the mobility of reconnaissance groups, buggies are best suited. These are the pros. At the same time, it is the lack of armor that can be attributed to the disadvantages of using these vehicles, which are supplied to the amphibious formations.
39 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Courier
    Courier 31 July 2020 08: 54 New
    -6
    I remember laughing a lot at American buggies. And they took it and copied it. As always in the military car industry.
    1. marchcat
      marchcat 31 July 2020 09: 01 New
      0
      The use of a buggy has been discussed for a long time, but things are still there. They pull forever, the cat for .....
    2. stalki
      stalki 31 July 2020 09: 41 New
      +6
      Yes, there was simply no need and it was tolerable for the time being. Well, why let's say buggy in Siberia? Or in the northwest region, where there are only swamps? But in Syria they can come in handy.
    3. Doliva63
      Doliva63 31 July 2020 19: 19 New
      0
      Quote: Courier
      I remember laughing a lot at American buggies. And they took it and copied it. As always in the military car industry.

      Why only in the military car industry? laughing
    4. The comment was deleted.
    5. Atlant-1164
      Atlant-1164 1 August 2020 15: 19 New
      +6
      so who is whose clone?






      The buggy has no body: it is replaced by a solid spatial frame made of pipes, supplemented by several simple panels (roof, front shield, sills). Therefore, to securely fix the crew members, 5-point seat belts are installed on all three seats. But the own weight of the M-3 is rather modest: about 820 kg excluding fuel. The spring suspension of all wheels is made completely independent, on struts with springs and gas-filled shock absorbers: front - with double wishbones, rear - with oblique levers. Many classic SUVs will envy its course: 280 mm at the rear and 450 mm at the front! The ground clearance under the longitudinal axis of the buggy turned out to be 350 mm. All this made it possible to dispense with the drive only to the rear wheels - fortunately, with a rear-engined layout, they account for the lion's share of the weight, even if empty, even if fully loaded.
  2. Hydrography Bay Golden Horn
    Hydrography Bay Golden Horn 31 July 2020 09: 05 New
    -10
    The first and in battle the buggy was used by the USA, Delta
  3. Free wind
    Free wind 31 July 2020 09: 12 New
    +1
    In order for the Machine to reach its potential, constant training is needed. This is not a UAZ, there is a complete extreme. Plus, after each pokatushek, the form can be thrown away, no machine can withstand so much dirt. Or you need a different form for the paratroopers.
    1. georgiigennadievitch
      georgiigennadievitch 31 July 2020 10: 04 New
      0
      These are quite solvable issues. The win is in increasing mobility. In half an hour, the landing party may not be at all where it was expected, but tens of kilometers away.
  4. Alexander X
    Alexander X 31 July 2020 09: 42 New
    +7
    It's better to drive badly than to run well ... Appropriate ©, buggies are needed for fast movement of groups of military personnel. IMHO
    1. zadorin1974
      zadorin1974 31 July 2020 11: 31 New
      +6
      Good Alexander. Light transporters (you can call them even buggies, even tryndyvoz) are needed for DRG, BUT !!! OH, the transporter must be reliable, light (airmobile), high-speed, with high cross-country ability, BUT !!! they don't say why that !!! HE should also be quiet (as SILENT as possible) with good carrying capacity, the engine is omnivorous and economical. Then it makes sense. If all these carts will be done at the level of civil scooters, then our reconnaissance will be it is audible for five kilometers and having driven 50 km the scout will look for 98 gasoline behind enemy lines with wild efforts.
      1. Free wind
        Free wind 31 July 2020 14: 58 New
        +1
        Well, then everywhere already in Europe and 93 gasoline is problematic to find, all cars switched to 95. You can't put a diesel engine on, we can't make them for the car industry either. In terms of volume, if some not the smartest person throws out the glushak, it will be loud. I had to invent a muffler even for my mother, it turned out even quieter. Everything goes in a circle, Motorcycles were introduced before the war, for mobility. Then armored cars, now they returned to motorcycles again. I would not want to be in this thing in the cold.
        1. Ramon Merkader
          Ramon Merkader 31 July 2020 15: 34 New
          -1
          Greetings. I also saw a direct analogy with the stroller, but the "buggy" is more modern))
          And behind the noiselessness, this is for hybrids (pure electric traction will not be the topic here).
        2. Sergey Kulikov_3
          Sergey Kulikov_3 31 July 2020 15: 56 New
          +1
          What about snowmobiles? What is the difference!?
        3. Doliva63
          Doliva63 31 July 2020 19: 24 New
          -1
          Quote: Free Wind
          Well, then everywhere already in Europe and 93 gasoline is problematic to find, all cars switched to 95. You can't put a diesel engine on, we can't make them for the car industry either. In terms of volume, if some not the smartest person throws out the glushak, it will be loud. I had to invent a muffler even for my mother, it turned out even quieter. Everything goes in a circle, Motorcycles were introduced before the war, for mobility. Then armored cars, now they returned to motorcycles again. I would not want to be in this thing in the cold.

          In a winter suit, but under adrenaline - you won't even notice the frost laughing But yes, the machine must be very quiet, otherwise it is not needed for reconnaissance.
        4. denis02135
          denis02135 1 August 2020 19: 05 New
          0
          Dear, but in the US, most people drive 87.
          1. Free wind
            Free wind 1 August 2020 19: 25 New
            0
            Well, America has its own standards, 87, 89,91 in America, 92, 95, 98 we have. We still produced in the USSR, 98 with a quality mark, for 114, 117 ZILs.
      2. Alexander X
        Alexander X 4 August 2020 18: 57 New
        0
        I ride a quad - a tiny glushak transforms the roar of the engine into a rumbling. But you can also hear it in the forest for 500 meters. Engine power does not bother anyone, but it adds weight significantly and increases gas consumption. I have in my garage a motorcycle dog with a Chinese 9-liter engine. from. - quite decently pulls me and add. sleigh despite the fact that
        simple engine is constructively ridiculously. If we set up similar, slightly more powerful engines, then quadrics and buggies are not a problem.
    2. Victorio
      Victorio 31 July 2020 11: 58 New
      +1
      Quote: Alexander X
      Better to drive badlythan good to run

      ===
      yes carry equipment
  5. askort154
    askort154 31 July 2020 09: 47 New
    -1
    The maximum possible travel speed is 155 km per hour.

    And what remains of the goat is the horns and legs. crying
    1. Doliva63
      Doliva63 31 July 2020 19: 26 New
      +1
      Quote: askort154
      The maximum possible travel speed is 155 km per hour.

      And what remains of the goat is the horns and legs. crying

      And it depends on the specific user, BRDM-2 105 km / h ran without problems laughing
  6. Maki maki
    Maki maki 31 July 2020 09: 59 New
    10
    At the same time, it is precisely the lack of armor that can be attributed to the disadvantages of using these vehicles.

    For a buggy, the lack of armor is a plus. Buggy is an alternative to the running fighter. If you want armor, get into an armored car.
  7. Izotovp
    Izotovp 31 July 2020 10: 10 New
    0
    It would still be floating, like a TPK based on LuAZ!
  8. Pavel57
    Pavel57 31 July 2020 10: 13 New
    10
    The first buggy was a sidecar motorcycle.
  9. Livonetc
    Livonetc 31 July 2020 10: 13 New
    +3
    A paratrooper, descending by parachute, has no armor.
    The paratrooper's primary security is speed and surprise.
    Buggy just provide speed.
    And the airborne forces have armored vehicles intended for landing.
    You give more good and DIFFERENT funds!
  10. Strashila
    Strashila 31 July 2020 10: 35 New
    -1
    "Nobody is going to send these machines to the front line, but as a means of reconnaissance," conducting reconnaissance is not the front line. The question is how they will actually use such a tarantass with weapons.
    1. Piramidon
      Piramidon 31 July 2020 11: 00 New
      0
      Quote: Strashila
      reconnaissance is not cutting edge

      Reconnaissance is mainly the rear (of the enemy)
      1. Strashila
        Strashila 31 July 2020 12: 17 New
        0
        Nuda-nuda, there is no shooting in your opinion.
        1. Lebed
          Lebed 31 July 2020 13: 53 New
          +7
          If they shoot, then this is already "reconnaissance in force"
        2. Piramidon
          Piramidon 31 July 2020 19: 44 New
          0
          Quote: Strashila
          Nuda-nuda, there is no shooting in your opinion.

          Whether they shoot or not is another question, but in any case, this is not the front line or the front line.
  11. Ryaruav
    Ryaruav 31 July 2020 10: 38 New
    +4
    And where is the advertised Chechen buggy, it seems that they were going to establish mass production, where did it go?
    1. Victorio
      Victorio 31 July 2020 11: 54 New
      0
      Quote: Ryaruav
      And where is the advertised Chechen buggy, it seems that they were going to establish mass production, where did it go?

      ===
      did not take root, probably. and a little too small
  12. The comment was deleted.
  13. Mikhail3
    Mikhail3 31 July 2020 12: 44 New
    -3
    It's high time. Speed ​​in many cases is much more important than protection, especially when you landed behind enemy lines. An absolutely essential thing for those who know how to use it correctly.
    At one time, young capitalism welcomed firearms because they did not need to train a Warrior to use them. A couple of days to learn loading and shooting somewhere in the direction of the enemy formation, a sergeant with a stick for fear, and that's it. The battlefields began to fill up with meat. And now history has completed a complete spiral.
    Now the "user of firearms" is again of the highest level of the pro, and then he is able to defeat anyone, as long as there are cartridges and equipment. Such buggies will help him a lot. Sometimes I think - after all, in that War the Red Army had thousands of light, high-speed tanks. If this army knew how to use them, the Germans would have washed themselves at 41 ...
    1. cat Rusich
      cat Rusich 31 July 2020 21: 47 New
      0
      Mikhail, "young capitalism" used a firearm as a "firearm", in a battle to approach the enemy at close range and shoot, then "with bayonets" whose "intestine is thinner" escapes from the "phalanx of bayonets". They served in the regular army from "as long as there is enough strength and health" to 25 years (less in practice) - all the time was spent on training soldiers to go in line without fear into battle without fear of canister and rifle volleys of the enemy. We recall the tactics of the battle of the Caroliners Karl 2 and the words of Suvorov - he meant shooting for sure, point-blank, and finishing off with a bayonet. Today, "personal firearms" do not require special skills - he took an AK and into battle ... For reconnaissance, you need a "machine" on which you can put reconnaissance equipment, how much and what is supposed to be put on "Strela"? - just go and see where they start shooting at you?
      1. Mikhail3
        Mikhail3 1 August 2020 15: 50 New
        0
        You don't understand well what you know) It is very common among historians, reenactors, experts in ancient weapons and equipment. The first paragraph of your own (unfortunately not divided into paragraphs) text is an illustration of my statement.
        In your understanding, a spear is such a stick with a tip, which is enough to be able to poke anywhere. You see, the problem is that the spear is a very difficult weapon to master, like any cold one. Very, very difficult. Even bayonet fighting, which is a tiny piece of spear fighting, is a very difficult thing to learn. And a rookie will be able to fully wield a spear on the battlefield after at least a year of training, not earlier.
        The same applies to all types of edged weapons, with the exception of the bow. You need to start practicing bows from 3-4 years old and work all your life, that is, taking into account medieval realities, an archer goes into battle after at least 10-12 years of training. Allegations that a person was taken for 25 years in order to teach him to go into battle without fear during this time ...
        Learning to go into battle without fear is not difficult and not long. They just kill the one who chickened out. Or enemies, or their own sergeants and officers. So either the medieval recruit knew how to curb his fear already in the second battle, or he began to rot in a ditch, no longer interested in the art of war. 25 years is a long time, a whole life.
        It was like "renting land for 99 years," that is, forever. In 99 years the descendants will understand. So it is here. The state took a person for a military unit. So that he would defend his compatriots for a lifetime and attack enemies. If he wanted and had an incredible skill as a survivalist, then he lived to see the end of his term, but very rarely "quit", since nothing awaited him outside the army, and he could not do anything there. Well, etc.
        The world of cold steel was a "world of the warrior", in which people who devoted all their time to the art of war were the determining force. They introduced and approved the concepts of honor, conscience, nobility, loyalty, all human qualities that we consider to be positive come from that time, because it is these qualities that help the masters win in battle. "There is no greater love than to lay your belly for your friends."
        And then came capitalism, in which those who are more cunning, meaner and shameless win. And the nascent capitalism did not have troops, because the warriors disdained capitalists! And firearms have become a panacea, because some kind of pishchal needs only be charged (two or three days to master the operation) and fired somewhere in the direction of the enemy formation on command. Instead of many years of training - a couple of weeks of drills, and you can "spend" a new recruit in the next battle as you describe, without understanding yourself.
        So it was over. It seems to you that since you no longer need to hammer gunpowder into the barrel, then a wad, then a bullet, then again a wad, then shooting from a machine gun is easy?) Yes, shooting is easy. It is difficult to fight with modern firearms. If you take the machine gun according to your opinion, then you will not go into battle, you will jump out for slaughter, for fertilization, which will immediately happen to you. And the warriors who returned will remain on the battlefield. The guys of Hora, numbering 15-30 people, captured entire countries, destroying sometimes hundreds, and sometimes thousands of opponents in one battle.
        Knowledge is not yet reason. You have the knowledge. But to think ...
        1. cat Rusich
          cat Rusich 1 August 2020 20: 29 New
          0
          Michael, let's start from the end. 1) About professionals: let's remember the capture of Amin's palace in 1979. Group "A", together with auxiliary units ("Moslem battalion") stormed the palace of "Amina" ... then they had to bring the 40th army into "country A", which mainly consisted of "conscripts", almost 10 years of fighting and had to leave ... "one successful operation by professionals" did not win the war in Afghanistan. To "consolidate" the results of "professional victories" you need a lot of "conscripts" or involve other "territory retention professionals", do we (Russia) have such professionals ??? 2) It is necessary to distinguish - "the ability to wield weapons" (even "cold", even "firearms") and "the ability to fight, to fight." They will teach how to assemble, disassemble, clean the AK and at school at the NVP lesson (they were in the USSR, they canceled it in Russia), they will teach DOSAF to shoot the bull's-eye (I understand, the same has already been "reformed") - to own AK, the "guy" has already been taught before the call. But how not to be killed by the first bullet, how to live and not die during the campaign, the "guy" will be taught in the army, and in order to become a real WARRIOR, and not a "mob reserve", you will have to stay on a "contract" - stay in the army for several years. 3) Before "capitalism" in the Middle Ages, all armies in Europe consisted almost entirely of mercenaries - "professionals", the capitalists came - they decided to increase the army to seize "someone else's property", but to reduce the cost of the army - a "regular army" appeared, which was recruited recruiting, the soldiers served FREE OF CHARGE (they did not pay salaries), the losses were compensated by a new recruitment. 4) "Bayonet fight" - several techniques learned to automatism - beat off the enemy's bayonet, prick the bayonet yourself, take out the bayonet and move on - that's all, as an example, using a saber in the army - 3 blows and that's it. The army is not a "Shaolin monastery" in which monks teach "kung fu" all their lives, KMB and into battle ... 5) "Warrior's world" - blood, blood ... the death of a warrior in battle or "straw death" at home. 6) "I take on a lease for 99 years" - Britain took Hong Kong from China on a "lease for 99 years" in 1899 - in 1998 they had to return the PRC back. 7) How was the "spear" used in battle? - let us recall the phalanx of A. Macedonian and the Spanish third - the "forest peak" stands on the defensive or slowly moves towards the enemy. The cavalry also used pikes - hit the enemy - release the shaft in the enemy and grab the saber. Fighting army against army is not the same as fighting "Shaolin monks" for tourists. 8) I will not argue about the bow, but in my understanding, the battle of SAGITTARIUS from the bow is throwing a cloud of arrows into the enemy formation, some will hit (an archer is more likely the one who makes bows, and shoots from a bow is an archer). 8) There is knowledge and there is skill. Every Russian knows how to lead the Russian national football team to win the World Cup good , but no one KNOWS ...
          1. Mikhail3
            Mikhail3 4 August 2020 09: 47 New
            0
            You know a lot for the average website visitor. But don't analyze your knowledge. As a result, you do not understand either me or even your own information warehouse. It's a pity.
    2. vVvAD
      vVvAD 2 August 2020 00: 52 New
      0
      And how did you miss the crossbows / crossbows, huh?
      At that time, there was no capitalism in the project, and shooting from crossbows without the corresponding skill of an archer (perfected, by the way, starting that way from 12 years, and somewhere - from all 8), with minimal amendments (right along the bed, except that without rear sight and front sight), and without trained for static loads, a kilogram of 60-80 muscles (for composite bows) - it was!
      By the way, their prototype - gastafet, "abdominal bow" - appeared in Ancient Greece.
      Only that in the most ancient Greece, in Russia, in the East, they did not receive distribution - bows beat further, more lethal and overhang. And for the serf militia - yes, that's it.
      But in the West there were no composite bows, and the English longbows had monstrous dimensions, so crossbows became a real breakthrough there - long before the advent of firearms.
  14. Catfish
    Catfish 31 July 2020 13: 48 New
    0
    Yes, it seems, "Chechen Auto" is already producing buggies for the needs of the army, is there really not enough of them that it is necessary to establish production at another enterprise. The machine is certainly necessary, but whether a different type is needed in the army, they always tried to avoid it.
  15. viktor.
    viktor. 31 July 2020 15: 56 New
    -1
    An ordinary Chinese ATV is assembled by us.