Belarusian motorized rifles received new Russian armored personnel carriers BTR-82A

The Belarusian army has been replenished with new Russian armored personnel carriers BTR-82A. The solemn ceremony of the transfer of new equipment took place on December 1 on the parade ground of the 120th separate guards mechanized brigade.

A large batch of new armored personnel carriers BTR-82A produced by the Arzamas Machine-Building Plant arrived in Belarus in October this year, there were no more official reports on the supply of armored personnel carriers. At the same time, the Belarusian Ministry of Defense announced that the equipment was intended for the 120th separate mechanized brigade. In addition, several pieces of equipment will enter service with the 72nd Joint Training Center and the Military Academy of Belarus. It is emphasized that all the armored personnel carriers of this batch are equipped with means of communication and sights made in Belarus.

On December 1, the 339th separate motorized rifle battalion from the 120th separate guards mechanized brigade received new armored personnel carriers. The equipment was handed over by the Commander of the North-Western Operational Command, Major General Alexander Naumenko. After the ceremony, the personnel of the battalion on the new BTR-82A departed to the place of duty.

The BTR-82A is a further development of the BTR-80. It uses anti-splinter protection made of multi-layer synthetic material on the inner surfaces of the case, as well as an anti-mine floor covering. In addition, the seats in the BTR-82A are made on a special suspension. The armored personnel carrier is armed with a combat module with a 2-mm 72A30 automatic cannon and a 7,62-mm PKTM machine gun. In addition, all armored personnel carriers are equipped with an additional protection kit, which includes armor plates and lattice screens.

As previously reported, all the BTR-82A supplied to the Russian and Belarusian armies are armored personnel carriers of a new construction, which have undergone the modernization of the BTR-80 to the level of the BTR-82, and are called BTR-82AM.

Comments

[Thrifty]

BTR82 in any form of yesterday's car!

[Cron]

Quote: Thrifty

BTR82 in any form of yesterday's car!

And what are today's and tomorrow's?

[Babay Atasovich]

Along the way with a plasma gun and quasi-vodka!

Quote: Cron

Quote: Thrifty

BTR82 in any form of yesterday's car!

And what are today's and tomorrow's?

[Thrifty]

Cron-boomerang, Kurgan, that's as soon as they are "given birth", like the wheel version on the Armata platform, and the Btr82 is hopelessly outdated, and I heard this from those military men who themselves serve in these sheds. And I don't care about the minuses, on the site for a long time the concept of an objective approach does not exist ...

[Cron]

Quote: Thrifty

Cron-boomerang, Kurgan, that's as soon as they are "given birth", like the wheel version on the Armata platform

Boomerang and Kurganets are good. But how does the Btr-82 stand in their way?

Quote: Thrifty

and the BTR82 is hopelessly outdated, and I heard this from those military men who themselves serve in these sheds ..

How many people, so many opinions

[Sergey Aleksandrovich]

An uninhabited combat module, albeit with a 30-mm cannon, is also a controversial decision. In my opinion, the single-seat module "Coast" would look better, the one that will be used to update the BMD-2. Moreover, if you put 2A72 instead of 2A42 on the "Shore", then the gas contamination of the fighting compartment will be lower.

[Gambit44]

The 30 mm cannon was also hopelessly morally obsolete a long time ago, it has long been replaced by a new 45 mm cannon, which was created by designers on their own initiative, but the bureaucratic apparatus of the Ministry of Defense did not want to develop it. Nerds))

[Barberry25]

there is no 45mm cannon ..

[Nikon O'Conor]

purely technically, they cannot yet create an automatic cannon larger than 30 mm

[Barberry25]

purely technically, there is already a ZSU Yenisei with a caliber of 37 mm, an NS-45 aircraft cannon with a caliber of 45 mm ... It's not that they can't, but that such a gun is not needed for nothing if there is a 57 mm S-60 automatic cannon ..

[Sergey Aleksandrovich]

The S-60 has a sleeve the same size as the 76-mm shell from the T-34 tank. Not every chassis can withstand such a recoil, and even more accurately shoot in bursts.

[Barberry25]

so no one shoots in bursts, single shots are fired, it is important that the hit of even one projectile disables the enemy BMP

[Sergey Aleksandrovich]

The rate of fire is not the least important indicator.

[Barberry25]

and the size of the ammo where to put it? 57 mm you can shove 80-120 shells into the core, no more, so it is not always effective to hammer in long bursts. Although there is a problem with a tank, let's say, when there are a lot of targets, but few shells .. Therefore, it is more optimal to install the complex weapons, for example, we put a 57 mm gun to combat armored targets, PKT to work on infantry at a distance of up to 1 km, an ATGM of course, a turret-mounted AGS and an automatic cannon connected to a 23 mm panoramic sight based on an aviation ... we get a balanced vehicle with a huge firepower power

[Reserve buildbat]

And UKSK for 8 "Caliber" on the trailer

[Barberry25]

and what is the problem actually?

[Reserve buildbat]

It's like an APC, isn't it? First of all, his task is to deliver the infantry to the line of attack. And you propose to hang three wagons of weapons on it, as a result of which there is not something like a landing, there will be nowhere for the crew to shove

[Barberry25]

for a long time, an armored personnel carrier is a wheeled infantry fighting vehicle in fact, and with an increase in reservation and requirements will be higher, so it is easier to create a universal combat module that allows you to immediately close all niches than to pervert in the form "we need a tank, and to it an armored personnel carrier with a machine gun", or how they kicked out a new promising bmpk and put Kord on it ... they would have put PKT alone

If you want an effective technique, put on it the necessary set of weapons, on the same Age 2 types of ATGM, a machine gun and a 57 mm cannon, if you do not forget that the BMP-3 has a couple of machine guns in the hull ..

[Nikon O'Conor]

Well, well ... in Grozny, it was exactly 30 mm that was valued, I pierced high-rise buildings through and through, and the density of the volley was at a height, and you will go into battle under the cover of SINGLE 45?

[Nikon O'Conor]

I will not argue, but the ammunition load? Where are we going to shove the troops if the entire volume is occupied by 45 millimeter paper ...?

[Lykases1]

Let's strap the gun from the T72 there. Nothing that this is an armored personnel carrier? They carry the infantry on it so as not to walk on foot. Him and 30 mm behind the eyes. Well, this car is not for a fight. And when they think differently, what happens is burnt iron and corpses

[Barberry25]

like this?

I agree, the best solution for the BTR-80 at the moment

[Sergey Aleksandrovich]

Something like that!

[Alexandr bogun]

Actually, he is right, we have, as it were, been testing the Boomerang for 5-7 years and now it is what we need, and the BTR 82a is an ordinary 80ka with more firepower due to the new module and that's it. Here it is not for patriotism, but for objectivity, for modern military operations the BTR-82a was relevant in the 2000-2010s. Now seeing the global trend in armor and firepower, 82kA is better than nothing and nothing more. Calling it "Newest" or "Modern" is, to put it mildly, an exaggeration. We need "Boomerang" in the troops.

[Cron]

Quote: Alexandr Bogun

Now seeing the global trend in armor and firepower, 82kA is better than nothing and nothing more. Calling it "Newest" or "Modern" is, to put it mildly, an exaggeration.

Nobody calls him that. This is a machine for specific tasks, for a moderate investment.

We need "Boomerang" in the troops.

Needed, no one argues with that either

[Alexandr bogun]

Quote: Cron

Nobody calls him that. This is a machine for specific tasks, for a moderate investment.

As a person on duty, I was in it, in the role of a landing party. So I'll tell you that the tasks for which it was created, it can perform, but it is not enough (if not to speak badly), to ride in it and even more so to dismount, this is also a quest for any fighter, even of average build in the same "Warrior" ... As an operator of PKP "Pecheneg" with a height of 1m.93cm. and then weighing plus or minus 90 kg, I in the literal sense of the word did not load and unload it, but got in and out. If this machine hits a mine or land mine where there will be TNT from 3 kg, then not a single combat-ready fighter will get out of this machine. An extreme 3-4 paratroopers may survive, but they are disabled for the rest of their lives. This is not a machine for modern databases ... when I see ours in Syria who are patrolling on the roads on them, then I am scared and sorry for the guys, sooner or later a land mine or mine and we will discuss here on the site and say: "how is it ... "

[Cron]

Quote: Alexandr Bogun

So I'll tell you that the tasks for which it was created, it can perform, but it is not enough (if not to say badly)

Your experience is very valuable. But in our conditions, this car is still necessary. On it you can get from point A to point B, having at least some armor and firepower. Still better than walking, or no armor at all. There is no longer a full-fledged war. But given our terrain, the size of the territories, I think it's still pretty good. Machine fit cleanly during a grand nix. When it will be necessary to move really significant forces. For some local wars, it is of little use.
Although I don't see any point in doing it from scratch. If only to upgrade the existing ones. The same BTR-90 was pushed aside in vain.

When I see ours in Syria who patrol them on the roads, then I am scared and sorry for the guys

Well, this is complete nonsense. I agree. Can't the guys be given a normal technique? The same boomerangs, etc. They don't need much. The security is just good, and the tests in real conditions, and the demonstration of the flag. Than to drive this technique on parades.

[Alexandr bogun]

Your experience is very valuable. But in our conditions, this car is still necessary. On it you can get from point A to point B, having at least some armor and firepower. Still better than walking, or no armor at all. There is no longer a full-fledged war. But given our terrain, the size of the territories, I think it's still pretty good. Machine fit cleanly during a grand nix. When it will be necessary to move really significant forces. For some local wars, it is of little use.
Although I don't see any point in doing it from scratch. If only to upgrade the existing ones. The same BTR-90 was pushed aside in vain.

I cannot agree with this thesis. I understand that throwing away or completely abandoning equipment that 10 years ago only began to massively introduce troops, more precisely, modernization, yes ... it's stupid. But it needs to be shaken off by our allies in the CSTO, Tajiks, Uzbeks, Belarusians, Kazakhs, Armenians. They are familiar with this technique from the 80s, there is no particular difference with the service, but we, in addition to money for the sale (even at a cheap price), will also receive for parts for years in advance. And for this money, to transplant at an accelerated pace to the "Boomerang" and "Typhoons".
And as for

Can't the guys be given a normal technique? The same boomerangs, etc.

here we understand each other)

[ioan-e]

Quote: Thrifty

BTR82 in any form of yesterday's car!

Exactly, let's not do anything like in the 90s, we will rename the motorized riflemen back to the infantry and as during the Second World War: "Eh the roads ..... Dust and fog. Cold alarms, and steppe weeds ......"

[Alexandr bogun]

Why do you exaggerate what has been said, you did not write that they need to be thrown out and that it is better to walk on foot! They wrote to you that this is the car of yesterday and this is objectively so. This is a regular 80ka with a new combat module to increase firepower and that's it. The trend is to see what class of protection is now in our potential enemies armored personnel carriers and 82ki! I don’t know about you, but as a landing party I had to be in this "modern" armored personnel carrier, I was not on it in the database, but dismounting during exercises or just being inside it is still a pleasure with my 1m.93cm. Anyone who has served in the army adequately and understands what he is in terms of protecting the BTR-82a, during "God forbid" the DB will not climb into it, they will sit on armor like in Afghanistan or Chechnya in the place of anti-cumulative screens. army, and not to defend our all outraged, even if it is objectively "yesterday." Sharavrniki called them the BTR-1117 "newest", and this is essentially the same 3ka, only a different module and minor improvements. We would have laughed here, but there is nothing bad to say about 82ku, because it is ours. I will be in objectivity, and not in outrageous patriotism.

[Lykases1]

When escorted by the columns, the landing force was actually sitting on the armor. But when we got away from the shelling we dived inside. Still armor.

[Alexandr bogun]

I don’t know from what shelling you dived, but my squad dived only when the authorities from the District came to the annual exercise or when there were some journalists. And so only the crew was in a hurry to get into this miracle. The rest, even in summer, even in winter, climbed on the armor.

[Lykases1]

I did not serve in motorized rifle, but I had to ride an armored personnel carrier. When we were leaving the shelling, the troops dived inside. Watched many times

[ioan-e]

The BTR-82 is a transitional vehicle, but the Boomerang is better, but the troops need it! But now, for a number of objective reasons, the Boomerang has not yet been adopted for service, and the troops must be saturated with armored vehicles, so what to do? From your own experience, tell me which is better - on horseback or on foot on the road?

[knn54]

- In addition, all armored personnel carriers are equipped with an additional set of protection, including armor plates and lattice screens.
This is the BTR-82AT.

[Graz]

If they give something for free what not to take, then this is not rubbish 50 years ago, which the British for money fused to the Baltic states and Ukraine

[lucul]

"If they give something for free what not to take, this is not rubbish of 50 years ago, which the British for money fused to the Baltic States and Ukraine"

If my memory serves me, Belarus paid more than $ 82 for each BTR-800A.
Lukashenka did not want to take them for a long time precisely because of their high price.

[Victorio]

Quote: lucul

then Belarus paid more than $ 82 for each BTR-800A.

===
"Sputnik" reports a price of $ 400.

and here are the prices for Ukrainian armored vehicles from the wiki:
/ The average cost of the BTR-4 under the 2009 contract for the supply of 420 armored personnel carriers to Iraq was about $ 1,1 million per unit [33] [34].
The average cost of the BTR-4 under the 2012 contract for the supply of 100 vehicle sets of armored personnel carriers to Kazakhstan was $ 1,5 million per unit /

[bistrov.]

Quote: Graz

If they give something for free then take something

Why are you talking about nonsense? Nobody gives any "freebies". Belarus pays for everything, albeit not at the highest prices, but the cost of production and the minimum profit of the enterprise are observed, after all, Belarus is our main and, unfortunately, the only ally.

[vitvit123]

Isn't the margin between market prices and dumping prices a freebie? Those. the car costs a million, and you bought it for 500 thousand, the other 500 thousand. This is not a freebie?
So I doubt very much that Belarus would be able to pay for a nuclear power plant - for example, and it builds a nuclear power plant .. and it’s incomprehensible, if there is no freebie, then who loses? Miracles do not happen .. if someone, somewhere, did not pay extra, then someone, somewhere, did not receive it .. no?

[Normann]

Is there a queue for these cars?

[vitvit123]

I asked something - wrote about the queue? I was interested in the name of the difference in price for Belarus, it is covered by Russia .... there is no question of any queues ..
Try to sell for everyone at the price of Belarus, your turn may appear, but why don't we pull so many freeloaders ...

[Ryazan87]

The purchase is taking place within the framework of a loan allocated by Russia. And at a price half the market price. So..
The mustachioed one is still an "ally". "Bahatovektary".

[spirit]

In terms of protecting the crew from bullets / shrapnel and mines, as well as the convenience of landing, 82 of course has long been outdated in comparison with the same MRAP, in terms of armament it is quite enough. In general, it's cheap and angry, for me it is so necessary to rivet some kind of stripped-down (cheaper) version of the boomerang in large quantities

[Graz]

Mrap and armored personnel carriers are still different things. although the tendency to merge these 2 directions can be traced

[tralflot1832]

So we are also modernizing the Belarusian SAU to our level. The Belarusians have already received one batch, the next in 2022.

[Grits]

I noticed that there are four peculiar mini-bumpers with rubber dampers on the nose. Either I didn’t notice them before, or they weren’t there before?

[Victorio]

Quote: Gritsa

I noticed that there are four peculiar mini-bumpers with rubber dampers on the nose. Either I didn’t notice them before, or they weren’t there before?

===
there are also old photos

[Den red]

Interestingly, it will withstand 12.7 mm in the sides now?

[Pavel episkop]

In vain the stool armored troop-carrier 90 rejected ... Ehh .. There, the shoulder strap allowed the turret from the BMP 3 to be installed and it was clearly better for protection .. And the hulls of the old BMP 3 and so they want to start up under the new module ... the towers were useful ...

[saygon66]

- So they took the ready-made ... And what will happen now with the various developments of the Belarusian defense enterprises? After all, there were interesting cars ...

[Adimius38]

New old stuff of the last century. The hulls have to be put somewhere, just a "new" turret and a little tuning have done, again, the filling of this turret is mostly Soviet. I agree that it is better than the BTR-80, but the concept is old, the car was not even yesterday, but the day before yesterday. And Boomerang seems to be simply sabotaged by dishonest comrades, there is no other explanation for this fuss since 2013. This is the same hassle as with the MiG-35. Talks about the purchase of the MiG-35 for the Air Force have been going on since 2009, but no specific dates and volumes of aircraft delivery have been named.
Development of the MiG-35 fighter began in the first half of the 2000s, and the aircraft was rolled out in January 2007. By 2010, only three prototypes were built, which were tested and participated in various aviation exhibitions. Information about the aircraft throughout the entire time of its development came in scanty, with long interruptions, and the fate of the fighter was not determined for a long time. in the yard the end of 2021 and two pre-production intensified

[Gambit44]

Quote: Cron

And what are today's and tomorrow's?

BTR "Boomerang", Kurganets-25, T-15 "Barberry", BMP-3M "Dragoon", BMP "Manul". These machines need to be brought to mind and massively supplied to the troops. And not this rubbish BTR-80 and all its other wretched modifications.

[Gambit44]

Quote: Thrifty

BTR82 in any form of yesterday's car!

Quite right! Rare shit that should have been written off 10-15 years ago. But in our Ministry of Defense there are corrupt vile fat bureaucrats who spend colossal money on the type of modernization of this wretched shit))

[Barberry25]

BTR-82AM is from the old BTR-80