Press of Ukraine: The BMP-3F received by the Russian marines surpass the "naval" BTR-4 of the Armed Forces of Ukraine

58

In Ukraine, they believe that it is urgently necessary to modernize the BTR-4 in service with the marines. This is due to the fact that the BMP-3F received by the marines of the Russian Federation are significantly superior in their combat qualities and technical characteristics to the "sea" BTR-4 with which the Armed Forces of Ukraine are equipped. This is the opinion of the Ukrainian observer Ivan Kirichevsky in an article published by the Defense Express portal.

The first battalion set of new combat vehicles will receive the 810th Marine Brigade of the Black Sea fleet... This will allow Russian marines to land by swimming, without landing ships entering the enemy coast.




Kirichevsky believes that in response to such a threat, the Ukrainian defense industry must create an "adequate response." For some reason, he sees such a response not to strengthen the antiamphibious defense of the coast, but to create combat vehicles for the marines of the Armed Forces of Ukraine, which are not inferior to the Russian ones.

The BTR-4 in service with the Ukrainian fleet, the press of Ukraine notes, is inferior to the Russian tracked BMP-3F both in driving performance and in armament.


The new equipment of the Black Sea Fleet marines is capable of disembarking from a landing ship, swimming to the coast and continuing to move overland. At the same time, it is much easier for her to get ashore with the help of tracks than with wheeled vehicles.

Probably, in terms of its firepower, the vehicle surpasses all other infantry fighting vehicles in service with the armies of the world, and is comparable to the light a tank... Armored amphibians are armed with 100 and 30 mm cannons, as well as anti-tank missile systems.
  • Kurganmashzavod, https://morozov.com.ua/
Our news channels

Subscribe and stay up to date with the latest news and the most important events of the day.

58 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. -50
    2 August 2021 18: 01
    It is necessary to mine. It's effective.
    1. -32
      2 August 2021 18: 11
      Someone else's is always tastier, especially for free ... and any inflatable ship will cope with this BTP-3F (it's good that there are a lot of inflatable ones), if it doesn't go to the bottom voluntarily and compulsorily, so without much excitement .. However, if I understood correctly: vehicles of a different class - on the one hand BMPs, on the other - armored personnel carriers and they also perform different tasks ... how is Kirichevsky going to equalize them?
      1. +15
        2 August 2021 21: 53
        When I looked at the "-", I read it carefully, I realized where my mistake was: some words need to be put in quotation marks and more sensibly express my thought - what an "air mattress" can do against, at least 30mm, that's why it will go to feed at the bottom living, and the BMP-3F will fulfill its task. I'm sorry ...
      2. +2
        4 August 2021 03: 05
        If the number of clowns in 404 becomes critical, we will simply have to regulate their number by all available means. This is our duty to humanity.
    2. +20
      2 August 2021 18: 17
      Why mining? Your own coastline, so that your own will surely be blown up? And then, as always, Russia will be to blame?
      They seemed to be mining something near Mariupol, a few years ago. There, the pan must first be removed from the head. How do they generally imagine a battle between an armored vehicle and an BMP? Or are they going to shove a 152-mm gun into the APC. From their gloomy genius, and not so much to be expected.
      1. -30
        2 August 2021 18: 20
        There is no need to mine the sea in case of danger of an enemy landing.
        1. +14
          2 August 2021 18: 24
          Well, everything is clear with you. Do you even have an approximate idea of ​​the depth of the Sea of ​​Azov? There you can move away from the shore from a kilometer and you will have water up to your waist. And where does the Ruin find so many mines? And most importantly, how will they be mined?
          1. -28
            2 August 2021 18: 26
            What I suggest is standard defense practice, especially against overwhelming enemy forces.
            1. +15
              2 August 2021 18: 30
              I didn't understand, but that the Russian Federation has already declared war on Ukraine? Are they already loading troops in Sevastopol?
            2. +12
              2 August 2021 19: 06
              And Russia will trample as Kapelevtsy slender rows and straight on mines and machine guns ????
              1. -43
                2 August 2021 19: 12
                To trample, you first need to defuse mines, and this takes time
          2. +6
            2 August 2021 18: 40
            The minimum depth for an anchor mine is 12 m ... in the Sea of ​​Azov there is where to "roam" ...
            1. +2
              2 August 2021 19: 40
              It is unlikely that the Ukrainians will be perverted with the PDM-3Ya. Rather, they will throw ordinary pin-type LDMs from the GPTRs off the coast - they were just made to counter the landing.
          3. 0
            2 August 2021 19: 38
            Quote: Kayala
            And most importantly, how will they be mined?

            Standard - pin LHDs off the coast at depths of 1-2 meters.
            The ambush is that the first storm will multiply this minefield by zero.
          4. The comment was deleted.
          5. -3
            2 August 2021 20: 56
            Where is this depth, tell me
          6. -12
            2 August 2021 21: 38
            With the depth of the Sea of ​​Azov, you are wrong.
            There are some shallow water areas, but in general the depth is rather big
            1. +3
              2 August 2021 22: 22
              Avior (Sergey)
              With the depth of the Sea of ​​Azov, you are wrong.
              There are some shallow water areas, but in general the depth is rather big
              I mean, not small, open the Internet or something. The maximum depth in the Sea of ​​Azov is 13,5 meters. Somewhere below they wrote that the minimum depth of anchor mines is 12 meters.
              And there is shallow water almost everywhere along the coast. Don't believe me? Go check it out.
              1. ANB
                -1
                3 August 2021 00: 15
                ... Go check it out.

                I went and checked. Well, not up to the waist, up to the neck all the same. If you didn't climb the sandbank. :)
                1. +2
                  3 August 2021 10: 32
                  Quote: ANB
                  I went and checked. Well, not up to the waist, up to the neck all the same. If you didn't climb the sandbank. :)

                  Yeah, as I remember now - the sea is near Yeisk: knee-deep - waist-deep - knee-deep again - waist-deep again - knee-deep again - but when will it be possible to swim ?! smile
                  1. ANB
                    0
                    3 August 2021 12: 22
                    ... the sea near Yeisk:

                    So Yeisk in the Taganrog Bay. We must at least get to Golubitskaya.
    3. +5
      2 August 2021 21: 12
      Quote: Alexander Pseudonym
      It is necessary to mine. It's effective.

      We will mine the "sea" BTR-4 of the Armed Forces of Ukraine, why sho? Ha?
  2. +3
    2 August 2021 18: 01
    What is your Ukrainian business. You have your own Yalta, rest there.
    1. -23
      2 August 2021 18: 03
      I'm from Russia.
      1. +9
        2 August 2021 21: 19
        Shurka you got bacon from wide trousers ...
        1. -1
          3 August 2021 09: 16
          Good answer. And then there are a lot of aggressive commentators.
      2. 0
        3 August 2021 00: 10
        You make a mistake, another "docha officer" on VO :))) And uk with an Israeli accent :)))
  3. +1
    2 August 2021 18: 03
    Ochepyatki
    received by the marines of the Russian Federation BTR-3F
    1. +3
      2 August 2021 18: 26
      Maybe BT-3F?
      The Armed Forces of Iraq and Indonesia have long ago put the BTR-4 on the joke
      1. +2
        2 August 2021 18: 31
        Quote: knn54
        Maybe BT-3F?

        I thought too. But there is no 100mm cannon.


        All the same, we are talking about the BMP-3F. And it's not even funny to compare it with the Ukrainian armored personnel carrier .. And not because of the country of the manufacturer of the latter, but for quite understandable reasons.
  4. +9
    2 August 2021 18: 05
    Is it there sho, the separatist says? Doubts about the first army in Europe? Btr4 is the best ersatz and wundeowaffe! More powerful current mortar "hammer", helicopter mi2 and submarine "Zaporozhye". The BTR4 uses a unique, patented armor with nanoholes!
  5. -30
    2 August 2021 18: 06
    The militia can "thank" Gazprom thanks to which the Ukrainian Armed Forces are rearming.
    Russian paratroopers by the way, happy holidays! (without any irony).
    1. +3
      2 August 2021 18: 30
      Who?) In fact, judging by the reports of their naphtha every year in losses, except for one when their fine broke off from the court decision) The same one when the decision due to the unfavorable economic situation in 404 became the main thesis) To celebrate, they wrote out bonuses for themselves) And then that's it. Minus)
      1. -8
        2 August 2021 19: 30
        Quote: carstorm 11
        In fact, judging by the reports of their naphtha every year in losses, except for one when their fine broke off from a court decision

        wrong. 2019 without losses, 2020-coronavirus for everyone and losses for everyone - a big loss. 2021 profit again.
        They have a profit as soon as they began to set market prices (that is, tariffs skyrocketed)
        1. +2
          2 August 2021 19: 39
          19 years old I described to you above about the court's decision. From there, a record profit) And about the rest of Vitrenko's tales, tell me otherwise he yells that the profit is exaggerated but in fact 105 yards of losses))) for the quarter))) or do you think the head of the company is lying?)))
  6. +7
    2 August 2021 18: 16
    I do not understand! In a naval battle, the BMP 3F squadron will utterly defeat the BTR 4. It won't even come to an abardazh!
    1. +4
      2 August 2021 18: 28
      Yes ... it will be enough to make holes in the floats for them)))
    2. +9
      2 August 2021 18: 42
      Look at the sea battle of armored cars. laughing
      1. +1
        2 August 2021 19: 51
        For naval combat will prepare "Sprut-SDM1" with a 125 mm tank gun. fellow
        1. +7
          2 August 2021 20: 34
          He, Octopus SDM1, UNDER THE WASHINGTON CONVENTION, how does the battleship not fall? wassat
      2. +1
        3 August 2021 15: 51
        They will line up in wake columns and will beat each other with side salvoes. wassat
        1. 0
          3 August 2021 16: 43
          That's just what I presented. lol
  7. +2
    2 August 2021 18: 30
    Lokhlam themselves would keep afloat))) not like creating an infantry fighting vehicle for the Marine Corps ... everything falls out of their hands
  8. 0
    2 August 2021 18: 32
    Piss when scared ...
  9. +1
    2 August 2021 18: 59
    Quote: Alexander Pseudonym
    There is no need to mine the sea in case of danger of an enemy landing.

    And put "friend or foe" on every mine?
  10. +1
    2 August 2021 19: 10
    who will explain to me the difference between F and simple
    1. 0
      2 August 2021 19: 42
      There was an article a couple of days ago.
      https://topwar.ru/185482-minoborony-prinjalo-reshenie-o-perevooruzhenii-morskoj-pehoty-chf-na-bmp-3f.html
    2. +5
      2 August 2021 19: 53
      Quote: Voletsky
      who will explain to me the difference between F and simple

      The most noticeable difference is the air intake pipe (when in working position). And a tower with breakers.

      The design of the BMP-3F compared to the BMP-3 has been modified to increase the buoyancy and stability of the vehicle. In particular, equipment for self-entrenching was excluded from the composition of the machine, a telescopic air intake pipe and a lightweight wave-reflecting shield were installed, and wave-reflecting shields were introduced on the BMP-3F tower.
      BMP-3F has high maneuverability afloat, has the ability to move in rough seas up to 3 points, and can also fire with the required accuracy in rough seas up to 2 points. The time of continuous presence of the vehicle in the water has been increased to 7 hours with the engine running, which ensures the safety and reliability of the BMP-3F operation at sea.
      The water-jet propellers installed on the machine allow the speed of movement afloat up to 10 km / h.
      The design of the vehicle allows the BMP-3F to go ashore in a breaking wave and tow a product of the same type.
      © Kurganmashzavod
      By the way, the non-retractable air intake pipes on the equipment quite strongly unmask the marines (more precisely, they make it easier to determine the ownership of the equipment) - in 2014 in the Crimea it was immediately clear whose armored personnel carrier it was.
      1. +2
        2 August 2021 21: 17
        Quote: Alexey RA
        in 2014 in Crimea it was immediately clear whose armored personnel carrier it was.

        Clearly the case of the Sevastopol!
    3. The comment was deleted.
  11. 0
    2 August 2021 19: 25
    Everyone is waiting for them to be attacked.
  12. -7
    2 August 2021 19: 33
    completely different cars. Moreover, the BTR 4 is actually not quite waterfowl.
    Comparison of who is stronger than a whale or an elephant. Modifications of the BTR 4 (especially the M) are stronger than the BTR on land. But if the landing party swim, then there's nothing to say.
    They compare it as stupid. However, journalists were given the freedom to write nonsense - and still get paid for it.
    1. KCA
      +4
      2 August 2021 19: 51
      And how is the BTR-4 stronger than the BMP on land? Does it also have a 30mm cannon and a 100mm cannon / missile launcher?
  13. +1
    2 August 2021 19: 56
    We compared the BMP3 with an armored personnel carrier made of conventional iron.
  14. -2
    2 August 2021 21: 54

    All the same, we are talking about the BMP-3F. And comparing it with the Ukrainian armored personnel carrier is not even funny.


    The armored personnel carrier must be compared with the armored personnel carrier, the infantry fighting vehicle with the infantry fighting vehicle.
  15. +1
    3 August 2021 02: 17
    And if you tell them that they can get from Sevastopol to the embankment of Odessa with low sea waves, then especially ardent "jumpers" will already begin to chew their ties ..
  16. +1
    3 August 2021 05: 21
    ))) as part of Russia there is no danger))) welcome))) home))
  17. 0
    3 August 2021 21: 35
    Quote: Avior
    With the depth of the Sea of ​​Azov, you are wrong.
    There are some shallow water areas, but in general the depth is rather big

    Quote: Alexey RA
    Quote: Kayala
    And most importantly, how will they be mined?

    Standard - pin LHDs off the coast at depths of 1-2 meters.
    The ambush is that the first storm will multiply this minefield by zero.
    So they mined the sea (including the Black Sea coast) with some mines and the coast too. The Okras themselves showed it.
  18. 0
    4 August 2021 17: 08
    A small clarification: the BMP-100 has no fluff at "3" ... Nope ...
    But - a starting device ... And this is not the same thing ... But quite the opposite. And it is essential. Gryazev / Shipunov were not driven empty! ... I would also like to note: BMP-3 can not only transport the crew from the side of the landing scow ... This "beha" can quite confidently navigate the water itself. And with a heaving wave (or a heaving wave?) Of up to 5 balls inclusive, it is not easy to transport the troops, but also to stream from the water along the coastal foes. They say it is quite successful ... As of even "now" it has no analogues in the world ... Nope ... "Friends" have something similar, but not buoyant and much less biting. Compare with "bradley", for example.
    By the way, who knows how much the second exhaust of the BMP-3 weighs from "100mm + 30mm + 1 in the tower + 2 course blast guns" ...? Something tells me that it is better not to hit the BMP-3 sighting point even for a second.
    Comparison with the APC is simply incorrect, in fact ...

"Right Sector" (banned in Russia), "Ukrainian Insurgent Army" (UPA) (banned in Russia), ISIS (banned in Russia), "Jabhat Fatah al-Sham" formerly "Jabhat al-Nusra" (banned in Russia) , Taliban (banned in Russia), Al-Qaeda (banned in Russia), Anti-Corruption Foundation (banned in Russia), Navalny Headquarters (banned in Russia), Facebook (banned in Russia), Instagram (banned in Russia), Meta (banned in Russia), Misanthropic Division (banned in Russia), Azov (banned in Russia), Muslim Brotherhood (banned in Russia), Aum Shinrikyo (banned in Russia), AUE (banned in Russia), UNA-UNSO (banned in Russia), Mejlis of the Crimean Tatar People (banned in Russia), Legion “Freedom of Russia” (armed formation, recognized as terrorist in the Russian Federation and banned)

“Non-profit organizations, unregistered public associations or individuals performing the functions of a foreign agent,” as well as media outlets performing the functions of a foreign agent: “Medusa”; "Voice of America"; "Realities"; "Present time"; "Radio Freedom"; Ponomarev; Savitskaya; Markelov; Kamalyagin; Apakhonchich; Makarevich; Dud; Gordon; Zhdanov; Medvedev; Fedorov; "Owl"; "Alliance of Doctors"; "RKK" "Levada Center"; "Memorial"; "Voice"; "Person and law"; "Rain"; "Mediazone"; "Deutsche Welle"; QMS "Caucasian Knot"; "Insider"; "New Newspaper"