MRAP v Iran

63


(MRAP, Mine Resistant Ambush Protected- Wheeled armored vehicles with enhanced mine and ambush protection)
The United Arab Emirates ordered the American X-NUMX M-ATV (MRAP-All Terrain Vehicle - wheeled armored vehicles with enhanced protection against off-road mines and ambushes). The US Department of Defense ordered more than 750 M-ATVs, and more than 7000 percent of them were already delivered (mostly to Afghanistan). Most of them cost about $ 80 600 each. The order quantity is twice the size of the older MRAP models ordered for delivery to Iraq. Many of these old models were in Afghanistan.

MRAP v Iran


M-ATV is a 15-ton, armored vehicle with independent wheel suspension 4x4. The payload is 1.8 t and it is capable of carrying five fighters (including the shooter). The maximum speed is 105 kilometers per hour and the range on the highway 515 kilometers. The size of the M-ATV is slightly larger than the Hummer. M-ATV costs about a million dollars, including equipment, weapons and transportation (transportation to Afghanistan costs about $ 150000).



Two years ago, when M-ATV began to arrive in large numbers in the troops, American troops in Afghanistan already used more than 7000 MRAP, but most of them were older models and were intended mainly for traveling on roads. The M-ATV design is similar to the MRAP design, but greatly modified based on combat experience in Iraq and Afghanistan. Now she can act on the road. With certain driving skills, the M-ATV had a much better throughput than expected. Unlike previous MRAP models, the M-ATV was specifically designed for off-road operations, especially in Afghanistan. The troops found that M-ATV was able to confidently overcome rugged terrain, which is usually dangerous for conventional MRAP. Practically the same as with a tracked off-road vehicle, here you can simply drive anywhere, but even a tracked vehicle can roll over or lose a caterpillar when driving carelessly. Due to the stability of the M-ATV commanders develop tactics of their application. The enemy can no longer hope that all MRAPs will remain on the road.



The improved M-ATV design is based on the fact that all other MRAPs were, after all, only heavy trucks. The design of the MRAP main capsule increased the center of gravity of the machine, which made it prone to tilting. They are also large vehicles, which leads to problems with maneuverability when passing through narrow streets. Most MRAPs suffer from the lack of sufficient torque and their power is somewhat insufficient for their size. And finally, being wheeled vehicles, they have not enough maneuverability on rough terrain (especially considering their high center of gravity). M-ATV was designed to solve all these problems with varying degrees of success.



The rush to supply MRAP to Afghanistan was associated with intentions to reduce casualties. The landing force and crew of these vehicles have great chances to survive the explosion of a roadside mine. The math is simple. If all troops facing roadside mines were on the MRAP, then there would be less victims by about 65 percent. Two years ago, about two-thirds of all casualties in Afghanistan were hit by roadside mines. Thus, these vehicles reduced the number of total losses by about a third. This is confirmed by the steady decline in roadside mine losses over the past year. Because of the MRAP, less than half of American casualties in Afghanistan are caused by roadside mines.



The UAE is facing growing problems with its Shiite minority. Iran, the largest Shiite nation on the planet, calls on the Shiite minority of the UAE to rebel against their Sunni rulers. If this happens, IEDs and roadside mines will be used - just what the MRAP does very well.
63 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +2
    9 August 2012 08: 16
    Well, that’s the first potential goal for the new Dehlaviyeh ATGM.
    1. +4
      9 August 2012 08: 45
      Most likely they will be burned, as before, by the good old RPG-7
      1. 0
        9 August 2012 09: 22
        They will put KAZ on them for light equipment and both old RPG-7 and new ATGMs will have a rest.
        1. DIMS
          +5
          9 August 2012 10: 13
          They will shoot three or four RPGs at the same time. Afghans have been using this tactic for a long time
          1. +11
            9 August 2012 10: 38
            They will buy diapers and shoot "three or four RPGs at the same time" ... laughing
            They switched to roadside mines because they are already unable to get close to the convoy at a distance of an RPG shot. Peacekeepers (yeah, they even have a UN mandate fellow ) UAV in almost every battalion.
            1. DIMS
              +1
              9 August 2012 10: 51
              Afghans fired without diapers
            2. +2
              9 August 2012 11: 53
              I want to surprise you, but this is not a problem because the Taliban are poor as church mice and they cannot afford a good means of transport. Therefore, they use explosives from fertilizers.
              1. +4
                9 August 2012 12: 04
                They are far from poor (they make billions of dollars in the production and smuggling of drugs), but they have a problem with the transportation of high-quality explosives. So they are content with nitrogen fertilizers.
                1. +3
                  9 August 2012 12: 14
                  This is not entirely true. Afghan is not very ethically homogeneous and other clans are mainly involved in drugs. I previously mentioned this, especially in this Tajiks excelled from the north. And if they had billions, they would not have bought home-made weapons from Pakistan. They wouldn’t use old rifles. For example, only the elders go with AKM (Soviet), and only the elite have AK-74.
                  And just the same delivery does not present a problem because in those areas that the ANA does not control and ISAF is sitting on the bases there is no problem with transportation.
                  1. +2
                    9 August 2012 12: 19
                    Read at your leisure Russia against drug barons
                    1. +3
                      9 August 2012 13: 11
                      Professor
                      I read it. I have other information that the comrade serves in the Federal Drug Control Service and, according to him, the bulk of drugs are grown just in the north.
                      + Do not confuse the Taliban and drug lords are different clans.
          2. 0
            9 August 2012 16: 12
            It is not as simple as it seems. Yes, and modern KAZ are designed not only for a single volley
        2. +2
          9 August 2012 12: 24
          what else to hang on a 15-ton machine, which even this weight barely pulls?
          One of the lightest Quick KAZ self-propelled guns (under development) weighs 140 kg and it has 3 charges. Osnalnye (type SAZ "Trophy") under 500kg weight.
          I am silent about the weight of dynamic protection ...
          So they burned and will burn.
          The main thing is that the PG-7 shots (and maybe newer tandem shots) are enough.
          http://russianguns.ru/?cat=279
          1. +7
            9 August 2012 12: 42
            Here they put on the Tiger and it did not fall apart.

            About tandem ammunition and KAZ generally amused.
        3. beard999
          +2
          9 August 2012 13: 20
          Quote: professor
          Put on them KAZ

          As you yourself wrote in the next branch - “when they put it, then we'll talk” ...
          1. +2
            9 August 2012 14: 13
            Firstly, it’s already standing, even on the Tiger (photo above).
            Secondly, I do not talk about hypothetical developments, but about a really created and tested device.
            1. +1
              9 August 2012 14: 36
              A nitshe that the Tiger is two times easier?
              And it becomes illogical to transform the "light" armored vehicle into a kind of armored personnel carrier.
              Then it's easier to buy "Strikers"! And the protection is stronger and more features at a price of less than $ 1,4M
              And the designers don’t know how to protect the tank ...
            2. beard999
              +1
              9 August 2012 18: 26
              Quote: professor
              First is already worth

              The conversation is exclusively about your article (translation), and the M-ATV discussed in it. And where does he “stand” there? Is it in the photo in the article? Do you have information that KAZ will be on the Arab M-ATV? Give a link?
        4. Insurgent
          0
          10 August 2012 23: 12
          You juggle an armored car with a tank in the event of a peter explosion, the shock wave will smash this can-can, and it weighs a lot
          1. 0
            11 August 2012 12: 02
            What is the shock wave of an ATGM explosion? How much is that explosive? KAZ is different, there is lightweight.

      2. red 015
        0
        9 August 2012 15: 45
        RPG-7 will do the trick
  2. +4
    9 August 2012 08: 47
    It weighs a lot, carries a little. A little more explosive charge and the car as in the photo is displayed in parts. And the guys are resting from the fighting.
    1. kapitan_21
      +11
      9 August 2012 09: 05
      Quote: Delink
      And the guys take a break from the fighting

      A little more landmine was laid and the guys rest from the fighting forever!
      In general, the car is good in terms of reducing losses! Our military industrial complex now began to make similar samples at KAMAZ and GAZ. We would have used such MRAPs in Chechnya at one time! soldier
    2. 0
      9 August 2012 16: 14
      We need to manage to deliver and deliver a little more. No one guarantees absolute protection.
  3. wolverine7778
    +5
    9 August 2012 09: 11
    The UAE will have these MPAP no earlier than January-August 2013, so probably Shiite uprisings and military operations against Iran are probably not expected to be expected before this period)))
    1. +2
      9 August 2012 10: 00
      Quote: wolverine7778
      The UAE will have these MPAP no earlier than January-August 2013, so probably Shiite uprisings and military operations against Iran are probably not expected to be expected before this period))

      There are Poles doing a thousand new light tanks, no earlier than 2014.
      1. Windbreak
        +1
        9 August 2012 16: 19
        This is a tape. I’ve thought up a thousand tanks. There are several types of equipment on the same base.
  4. Rockets
    +10
    9 August 2012 09: 17
    Cheap and angry

    WASHINGTON, Aug 7 - RIA Novosti, Denis Voroshilov. American armored vehicles, even of the latest design, have become completely vulnerable to Afghan militants creating and using increasingly powerful home-made explosive devices, the Washington Times said on Tuesday.
    The last incident with an American armored car in Afghanistan occurred on July 8 - the car blew up on a makeshift mine located on the side of the road. Six soldiers were killed.
    “The Taliban have switched to using more powerful bombs that are capable of hitting the best American-made armored vehicles.


    http://ria.ru/defens.../718642888.html

    http://www.washingto...ough-for-bombs/
    1. +6
      9 August 2012 09: 24
      And if you put 2 tons of plastic explosives, the effect would be even "cooler". Only now it is inconvenient to drag it across the mountains. wink
      1. beard999
        +2
        9 August 2012 13: 22
        Quote: professor
        And if you lay 2 tons

        Professor, you would first say which TNT equivalent the M-ATV holds, and then you would joke about the “two tons”.
        In fact, everything is much simpler. With a 10 liter bucket of a mixture of ammonium nitrate and aluminum powder, if I'm not mistaken, about 8 kg of TNT equivalent is obtained. M-ATV 8 kg holds? So that's great. The militants will mix and dig two buckets, then ... But 16 kg of TNT, M-ATV will not stand up without options. And no “2 tons” are needed.
        1. +1
          9 August 2012 14: 21
          Professor, you would first say which TNT equivalent the M-ATV holds, and then you would joke about the “two tons”.

          And you would first learn the materiel, for example, STANAG 4569 (it just says what kind of charge it holds), and then you gave advice.
          1. beard999
            0
            9 August 2012 18: 50
            Quote: professor
            And you would first learn the materiel, for example STANAG 4569

            Listen, I specifically asked you how much TNT holds the M-ATV? Instead of an answer, you send me NATO GOSTs to teach? Judging by your answer, you have the biggest gap in the knowledge of the "materiel" M-ATV. As for STANAG 4569, then at level 3b a high-explosive charge detonation under the mass bottom is 8 kg of TNT, at level 4b a high-explosive charge detonation under the mass bottom is 10 kg. According to "Level 5" I have information that is not official - 12-14 kg. Are you satisfied?
            Well, I repeat the question - how much TNT keeps the M-ATV under the bottom and what are you “2 tons” stuck to?
            1. -1
              9 August 2012 21: 27
              I will not repeat about Cornet specially for you - do not parrot.

              As for the STANAG 4569, then at the 3b level the detonation of the HE charge under the bottom mass is 8 kg TNT, at the 4b level the detonation of the HE charge under the bottom mass is 10 kg. According to "Level 5" I have information that is not official - 12-14 kg.


              Learn the materiel, in particular, what does the level of mine protection 4 and 4b mean by STANAG 4569 from M-ATV. And I already laid out this standard. wassat
              1. beard999
                -1
                9 August 2012 23: 56
                Quote: professor
                I won’t repeat the Cornet specifically for you - don’t parrot

                Of course you are not a "parrot." Everything is more commonplace. It is absolutely obvious that you are not able to confirm your speculations or any factual material. As I expected again, everything is unfounded ...
                Quote: professor
                And I already laid out this standard

                Yes to me on a drum your "standard". Did I ask about him? Or in such a simple way, are you trying to get away from the topic of conversation?
                It would seem that I am asking an elementary question - what TNT equivalent of a high-explosive action holds the bottom of the M-ATV? The answer should be only a number. So simple. But you strongly call her scrap. And why, professor?
                However, you do not want as you want. Obviously, your “2 tons” is completely absurd. As well as in general, your unsubstantiated allegations that the partisan formations will have some problems with the transportation and installation of the required mass of explosives for IEDs. Deliver and lay a couple of tens of kg of explosives, no problem. And no M-ATV will save. What actually has already been proven in reality, in the same Afghanistan. M-ATVs have been shipped to Afghanistan since the fall of 2009. In March 2010, more than 2240 vehicles were delivered. At the same time, according to iCasualties.org, in 2010-2011, as in previous years, more than 50% of American soldiers and officers died from explosive devices. And given the article in the Washington Times (the link to which you were given above), which most likely refers to the destruction of the M-ATV, when six were killed, the Taliban have no problems with undermining them.
                1. +1
                  10 August 2012 02: 58
                  You don't really care. You have been shown the "NATO" standard to which all this corresponds.
                  They pointed out that there is a marked decrease in the number of soldiers killed by explosives. There is no absolute protection. However, much can be avoided.
    2. 0
      9 August 2012 16: 16
      Respected. This is the so-called cheap sensations. High-power charges tore earlier. The question is that a charge of such power, as in the latter case, must be delivered and installed - and this is not easy, and most charges will remain within the maximum permissible limit.
      1. beard999
        +1
        9 August 2012 18: 51
        Quote: Pimply
        High-power charges tore earlier

        By itself. But at the same time, you don’t have to poison stories about “2 tons”. And it's not even about hundreds of kg of explosives. Enough doubling of the mass of explosives. Instead of 8 kg, they will make 16. Or will you assure that the militants have problems with delivering and installing instead of 8 kg, 16?
        1. +1
          10 August 2012 03: 03
          There is. I tell you this as a person who exploded several times in similar conditions. Usually, in order to really blow up a car, you need powerful explosives somewhere in the middle of the road. There, disguising it is long enough and difficult. As an option - a car with explosives. Also problematic. So these problems begin to surface. Most of the guys who tried in this way to destroy something more than the equivalent of a kilogram or two TNT, which can easily be thrown to the edge of the road, as a rule, ended badly. That is with fatal consequences.
  5. +6
    9 August 2012 09: 32
    Quote: professor
    Only here it is inconvenient to drag it through the mountains
    if these guys of the KPVT were dragged there then they will drag the explosives somehow! as they say for every tricky nut there is something))
    1. +6
      9 August 2012 09: 35
      The whole question is the availability of explosives. The more resistant the car is to roadside mines, the more headaches the spirits will have.
      1. +4
        9 August 2012 10: 27
        here the question is what the Taliban do not have access to modern explosives. But Iran has it and if it will deliver explosives in the case of a database, then the result will not be the same, but as for KAZ for Mrap, well, they’ll get gold ones from them. And the question will remain in changing ambush tactics.
        1. +1
          9 August 2012 10: 41
          Papelac costs $ 600 including its transportation of $ 000. KAZ costs only $ 150'000 - the real price.
          I would like to see the caravans with explosives from Iran to the UAE laughing
          1. +1
            9 August 2012 11: 54
            Yes, and the caravan is not needed here. If the Iranians are not cranks with the letter M, they will stockpile the materiel in advance. But I believe in this a little.
  6. +3
    9 August 2012 09: 37
    Given its cost and ATGM is not a pity.
  7. +1
    9 August 2012 09: 37
    a headache not with them, but with amers, but for those it’s a stupid way of life
  8. bulgurkhan
    -2
    9 August 2012 10: 10
    The UAE is facing growing challenges with its Shiite minority.


    In the UAE, no Shiites are found.
    1. +6
      9 August 2012 10: 44
      How? Have they been cut out yet?
      Muslim (Islam - official) 96% (Shia 16%), other (includes Christian, Hindu) 4%
      1. bulgurkhan
        +1
        9 August 2012 11: 09
        3 months ago, they all went over to Sunnism, Fognews reported this.))

        My mistake is related to the absence for a long time of any reports about the problems of the Shiite minority in the UAE.
        1. +1
          9 August 2012 11: 12
          The absence of messages does not mean the absence of problems.
          I do not believe that all without exception have passed into the branch of Islam they hate.
          1. bulgurkhan
            0
            9 August 2012 11: 27
            Professor, info agency Fognews reliable at 146%.
            You are all overseas and not in the know about media changes in Russia.))
            1. +1
              9 August 2012 11: 30
              Especially for you, "struck" 16% of the Shiites, including their mosques and imams.
              1. bulgurkhan
                +2
                9 August 2012 11: 35
                Professor, I have long recognized my mistake.)

                And here's to you about Fognews http://fognews.ru/v-prolive-long-ajlend-vsplyl-rpksn-proekta-955-borej.html
  9. +3
    9 August 2012 10: 11
    In reality, these machines can only be saved by running smartly not on roads but on rough terrain and the Afghans simply don’t know where this fool is going to put a bjak in the form of a pair of three 152 mm artillery shells under his belly or wheel. And so any vehicle can be disassembled into a component - the main brick is to take more and hit harder ...
  10. ilf
    ilf
    +5
    9 August 2012 10: 11
    A good armored vehicle, as they say, the experience paid for by blood, the Americans do not spare the funds to ensure the safety of soldiers, there is something to learn for our warriors
  11. DIMS
    +2
    9 August 2012 10: 18
    but even a tracked vehicle can roll over


    This is how to contrive? Easier to put the M-ATV on board with its higher center of gravity.

    or lose the track with careless driving


    Meant to remove the caterpillar? So less need to spin on the stones in place and the tension should be checked regularly
    1. Passing
      0
      9 August 2012 16: 39
      I was also amused by how they paint his "all-terrain". Facts are stubborn things, our armored personnel carrier has less weight, and the wheels are twice as large, but it cannot be compared with tracked vehicles in cross-country ability. So if the M-ATV is an "all-terrain vehicle", then only against the background of other American MRAPs, and even then, only on rocky ground, and in our latitudes it cannot even be compared with parquet SUVs.laughing
  12. +1
    9 August 2012 10: 28
    Interestingly, but how much diesel fuel is it? It’s easier to already blow up fuel depots, then these mraps will turn into stationary roadblocks))
    It would be interesting if active protection was put on all these 7000 cases.
  13. Rockets
    -1
    9 August 2012 10: 49
    Quote: ilf
    A good armored vehicle, as they say, the experience paid for by blood, the Americans do not spare the funds to ensure the safety of soldiers, there is something to learn for our warriors


    A sophisticated car, with all the electronic gadgets, (by the way mine) for tons of tons of money, could not protect the crew! What is learning? How to cut grandmas, so let them learn from us. Goal for invention is cunning. More reliable, no one, no matter what, did not come up with! We drove on the armor and we will ride. The chances of squeezing are much higher than in your sophisticated armored coffins. If we are already talking about undermining
    1. ilf
      ilf
      +1
      9 August 2012 11: 29
      We went, I go, and while we are going to ride on the armor much safer when undermining, I agree with you, I often go on a business trip in the Caucasus and there is no choice, but it’s recognized in my head when I’m on a battalion to get a flurry of enemy fire as a target on the field in a sudden ambush
    2. Alexey Prikazchikov
      0
      9 August 2012 12: 08
      Yeah, and when the face is blown up about the aswalt cool, still impressions remain laughing
      1. Rockets
        +1
        9 August 2012 12: 32
        Alexey Prikazchikov,
        Quote: Alexey Prikazchikov
        Yeah, and when the face is blown up about the aswalt cool, still impressions remain


        And the guys who died in super duper "coffins" don't envy you ...
        Everything is relative
        1. Alexey Prikazchikov
          0
          9 August 2012 17: 40
          No, there is nothing else good. I believe that mraps are needed before cutting, with small UAVs for guarding and modules with distance remotes, plus protivocommunications, we would definitely appreciate this.
  14. 0
    9 August 2012 11: 04
    The Taliban have to buy up anti-tank guns with shells from canned goods and camouflage them in the mountains, probably something like this. But IMHO ambushes will simply be more numerous, and there are more mines, as well as victims from them among residents
  15. Alexey Prikazchikov
    0
    9 August 2012 12: 09
    Yes, a cool car, especially a model with an eech module.
  16. Rockets
    0
    9 August 2012 12: 31
    Quote: ilf
    but it is recognized in the head while sitting on the Bétere to receive a flurry of enemy fire as a target on the field with a sudden ambush


    NO AND WILL NOT BE PROTECTED, FOR EVERY EVENTS!
    I agree that you need mine protection, bulletproof protection. But this is not a panacea
    In order to move around the terrain, it is dangerous relative to the bases, it is necessary that there would constantly be control (in real time) of the UAV over this terrain or the space component of reconnaissance. What today is not yet feasible even for them



    1. Alexey Prikazchikov
      0
      9 August 2012 17: 43
      Controls are needed in especially dangerous places, and reconnaissance along the road, plus normal security, need to be drone all the surrounding area by drones and constantly combed and a couple of groups with sackcloths in case of detection of militants.
  17. Darck
    +6
    9 August 2012 19: 19
    Envious again came ...
    (transportation to Afghanistan costs about $ 150000)
    This is the price of air transportation.
    They will shoot three or four RPGs at the same time.
    Just 3-4 RPGs, but it's not even armored personnel carriers wassat It is much easier to lay a mine or IEDs from an UY on the road, side projections are vulnerable to them.
    Most likely they will be burned, as before, by the good old RPG-7
    RPGs shot at hammwi, but there the fighters stayed alive, another thing is how do you get out of RPG if this kid goes at a speed of 90km per hour
    creating and using increasingly powerful homemade explosive devices,
    Even powerful tanks are not protected from powerful IEDs. There is a way to destroy it with any equipment, though it will cost a lot of effort.
    and the Afghans just don’t know where this fool will go to put her byak in the form of a pair of triple 152 mm
    In Afghanistan, the same people drive along the same routes every day. You have to be a very stupid Afghan to not know. And a pair of three 152mm artillery shells will smash the same T72.

    Given its cost and ATGM is not a pity.
    ATGM may not be a pity, but if you will use it in an open area, when there will be a column of such, then the Apache will take you off before you can aim your sight. And use ATGM in the city, as if uhh ...
    I looked at the criticism of this kid, it included his formidable appearance, which scares the locals. crying It seems that the diapers for the Taliban are still relevant.
  18. evening
    0
    10 August 2012 21: 56
    Declared for this armored car 15 tons of total mass - are unrealistic.
    What kind of wheels are there (there are four of them in total) to guarantee such a weight?