Armored car "Gadfly": modular failure of the Ukrainian industry


"Gadfly" at the exhibition in 2015

In recent months, Ukraine has lost several thousand armored fighting vehicles. To compensate for such losses, one has to beg for foreign equipment and restore vehicles from storage. In addition, unsuccessful prototypes that exist in one or more copies are sent to the front. So, recently an experienced armored car "Gadfly" was seen in the combat zone, which at one time attracted attention and was severely criticized.

At the exhibition and on the roads

The project of the armored car "Gadfly" was developed by the Zhytomyr Armored Plant (ZhBTZ) in 2015. Only one prototype was built on it, which in the same year became an exhibit of the Zbroya and Bezpeka exhibition. The characteristic appearance of this sample attracted the attention of the public, and specific technical features became a reason for criticism.

Soon the concern "Ukroboronprom" revealed the curious details of the new project. It turned out that ZhBTZ offers not just an armored car, but an original concept that allows mass production of such equipment. It was proposed to develop and assemble sets of armor modules for mounting on existing truck chassis of existing types. Modules could have different equipment and purpose. At the same time, the installation of a complete set on the chassis, according to calculations, should have taken less than an hour. The plant was ready to produce up to 1000-1100 sets annually - and make good money on army orders.

The first example of such a concept was the exhibition "Gadfly". It was made on the basis of the affordable GAZ-66 chassis. Similarly, it was proposed to re-equip cars of other brands and models, Soviet, Ukrainian and foreign production. In some cases, the need to refine the chassis used, for example, in the form of an engine replacement, was not excluded.

It is known that after the exhibition in 2015 the project was developed. Having received a number of negative reviews, ZhBTZ changed the design of the Gadfly armored units and improved some parameters. An experienced armored car also underwent revision and received some new elements. However, there were no major changes.

Despite the optimism of the development plant, an experienced armored car and a bold concept did not interest the customer in the person of the Ukrainian army. As a result, the project was not further developed. The construction of new prototypes was also abandoned. "Gadfly" arr. 2015 on the basis of the GAZ-66 remained in a single copy.

Over the next few years, the fate of the unusual armored car remained unknown. However, a few days ago it turned out that the "Gadfly" was in the war zone. A short video appeared on social networks showing a car driving along the street of an unknown settlement. Who got the armored car is unknown. At the same time, it can be assumed that his service will not be long and successful.

Modular design

The armored car was built on the basis of the GAZ-66 truck. The used chassis lost its standard cabin and cargo area, instead of which they installed "armor modules" of the original design. The power plant, transmission with the distribution of torque to all wheels and the running gear on two axles remained the same. The chassis with a carrying capacity of 2 tons withstood the new hull and retained the ability to transport some cargo. Whether it was possible to maintain the previous driving characteristics is unclear.

Armored car "Gadfly": modular failure of the Ukrainian industry

The visitor of the exhibition demonstrates the unique ergonomics of the armored cabin

The Gadfly project provided for equipping the chassis with two armored modules - a cockpit and a separate body for landing and weapons. Both modules were of welded construction. The 2nd level of protection according to the STANAG 4569 standard was declared - the armor had to withstand the hit of 7,62 mm automatic bullets. It also provided for the installation of attachments that increase protection to level 3 (7,62 mm armor-piercing rifle bullet). There was no special mine protection.

The regular cab of the GAZ-66 was replaced with a new module of a characteristic shape, due to which it was possible to close the front part of the chassis with the engine. Inside such a cabin there were two places for the crew. Access inside was provided by side doors and a pair of hatches in the roof. At the end of 2015, ZhBTZ spoke about the development of an updated cab with increased height and larger volume.

An armored module with the function of a landing compartment was placed behind the cabin. It was made in the form of a van with a hexagonal cross section. On the sides there were mounts for overhead armor. At the rear of the roof was a small superstructure with a machine gun mount. On board the hull and in the stern there were doors for landing. 12 passengers were asked to ride on a bench placed in the center of the hull.

The exhibition "Gadfly" was armed in the form of a machine-gun mount with a large-caliber NSV. In a recent video, an armored car is carrying an older DShK machine gun. Other weapons or the possibility of firing from a personal weapons were initially absent. In the modernized version of the project from the end of 2015, side embrasures were provided, but the experienced armored car did not receive them.

Numerous problems

The first reaction to the "Gadfly" was simple. Specialists and technology enthusiasts noted the extremely low aesthetic qualities of the armored car - with its dubious exterior, it resembled handicrafts from the Middle East. However, it soon became clear that his problems did not end there. The designers made a number of gross mistakes, which actually put an end to the project.

An armored car in one of the Ukrainian formations, June or July 2022

First of all, there were problems with ergonomics. It turned out that the armored cockpit was insufficient in size and volume. With acceptable convenience, a driver or passenger no more than 170 cm tall could fit and work in it. Taller crew members would have to bend over or open the sunroof - with known risks. To this were added specific controls left over from the GAZ-66 truck.

The troop compartment also turned out to be inconvenient in all respects. The side door was small and inconveniently located, and the use of the aft door was difficult due to the shape of the opening. The central shop was intended for the landing, and against the background of other armored cars it looked extremely strange.

It was argued that the driving characteristics of the armored car remained at the level of the base vehicle with a payload. Whether this is true is unknown. The shown test footage or recent video from city streets does not allow for an assessment of such parameters. At the same time, it can be assumed that the chassis of a common type somewhat simplifies operation and maintenance.

Reservations of level 2-3 of the NATO standard are generally sufficient for solving some combat missions. However, such armor does not provide any guarantee during shelling. In addition, it is obvious that both Gadfly corps will not withstand the shelling of anti-tank weapons. A significant problem is the lack of any protection against explosive devices.

Large-caliber machine guns are serious weapons and are suitable for combat missions. In addition, there is a fundamental possibility of mounting other weapons systems. However, the open installation of a machine gun or anti-tank systems leads to risks for the shooter. Whether the design of the Gadfly allows the use of a closed turret or a remotely controlled weapon station is unclear.

Natural result

At the heart of the project "Gadfly" were curious and promising - both technically and economically - ideas. However, the first result of this project was, to put it mildly, unsuccessful. Exhibition armored car in 2015 had a lot of technical problems and ambiguous features. In addition, the car was simply ugly.

The existing shortcomings, as well as a number of other factors of various kinds, led to the fact that the "Gadfly" did not interest the customer and did not go into series. ZhBTZ's attempt to improve the project was unsuccessful - the army also did not need an armored car with modified ergonomics and loopholes. As a result, everything was limited only to the construction and display of a single prototype.

For several years, the fate of the first and last "Gadfly" remained unknown. Now the situation has cleared up - the car was given to one of the armed formations for real exploitation. Apparently, the new owners were already able to fully appreciate all the shortcomings in the design and ergonomics.

Now they have to find out the real combat effectiveness of the machine. It can be assumed that the Gadfly, with all its inherent flaws, will fail this test as well. And in the foreseeable future, the armored car will be destroyed or become a trophy of the advancing allied forces. This will be a natural result, and besides, it will show what the Ukrainian military industry and the army eventually came to.
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +3
    15 July 2022 10: 15
    This thing looks like it was stolen from a carousel at a fair. Father Makhno designed it? wassat
    1. 0
      16 July 2022 14: 37
      Quote from: Artillerieunteroffizier
      This thing looks like it was stolen from a carousel at a fair. Father Makhno designed it? wassat

      And what does Makhno have to do with it?
  2. +4
    15 July 2022 10: 19
    Armored car "Gadfly": modular failure of the Ukrainian industry
    . An unfinished country with an unfinished industry.
    Shozh you goats s s radishes with Ukraine did .... idiots.
  3. -4
    15 July 2022 10: 33
    What country, such armored vehicles. I watched a video, the other day, a Mosin rifle, a model of the 1800s, from 100 meters pierced a Kozak armored vehicle, a model of the 2000s
    1. +1
      15 July 2022 10: 54
      So it is possible to break through a mosquito and a Tiger, all the same, the muzzle energy of 7,62 × 54 is much greater than that of the 7,62 × 39 Kalashnikov. And the booking is still designed for modern weapons, and not for museum exhibits
      1. +8
        15 July 2022 12: 30
        No, protection against 7,62 × 54 is quite laid down for itself, it can hardly be called a museum exhibit PC and SVD will confirm.
        1. +4
          15 July 2022 16: 17
          The same Tiger has protection class 3, and this is a 5-10 meters 7,62 mm cartridge 57-N-231 with a PS bullet. I'm not justifying Kozak, I just need to compare, not slander
          1. 0
            15 July 2022 18: 46
            Nobody is bullying anyone. Ukroreich stated that Kozak holds 12,7
            1. +1
              18 July 2022 10: 03
              Can you link to this statement? In the same wiki, it is written in black in Russian: STANAG 4569 Level 2, and there it doesn’t even smell close to 12,7
              1. -3
                18 July 2022 11: 22
                Look up the internet. You can also find videos on YouTube
                1. +2
                  18 July 2022 11: 46
                  It is considered good manners that a person who claims something should provide a link confirming his statement. I gave a link to the wiki, you suggest that I waste my time and look for proof of your innocence. Sorry but no. Either you provide a link, or I have every right to consider you a balobol
                  1. -4
                    18 July 2022 14: 49
                    I'm fualetovo, what and how do you think
                    1. +3
                      18 July 2022 15: 35
                      In that case, all the best, I do not intend to continue the conversation with the balabol
    2. -5
      15 July 2022 18: 45
      Ukrovermacht declares that this device holds 12,7 (I'm talking about Kozak
      1. +3
        16 July 2022 14: 39
        Quote: DeGreen
        Ukrovermacht declares that this device holds 12,7 (I'm talking about Kozak

        And where "he" said it, you can see?
        1. -5
          16 July 2022 17: 45
          There is such a thing as the internet. The Internet has Google. Seek to find
          1. +3
            16 July 2022 18: 39
            Quote: DeGreen
            Seek to find

            That is, I should look for evidence of your assertion? laughing What a twisted logic you have! wassat So you can lie, anything - look for evidence yourself! Didn't find it? So you searched badly laughing laughing laughing
            I even present some scientific work or article, with statements and conclusions. And instead of links to sources and used works - the inscription: Google to the rescue!!! good
            1. -5
              17 July 2022 08: 29
              Well, you're questioning my chlov
              1. +2
                17 July 2022 11: 44
                Quote: DeGreen
                Well, you're questioning my chlov

                I question everything. all the more unfounded statements. Especially concerning military operations. When people argue something, they usually refer to sources. So this is OBS...
                1. -5
                  17 July 2022 12: 18
                  Listen, cucumber or cucumber or eel, instead of writing garbage to me, climb into the tyrnet and look.
          2. +4
            16 July 2022 20: 20
            The armor provides protection against fire from small arms in accordance with the STANAG 4569 Level 2 standard, I can’t say that someone claimed something, but lvl 2 is protection against 7.62x39 armor-piercing bullets from 30 meters.
  4. +3
    15 July 2022 11: 56
    The very idea of ​​making quick-mount modules for popular civilian vehicles is undoubtedly the right one. Implementation of the idea, to put it mildly, nothing.
    Well, yes, where there are 12 landing people (in bulletproof vests, with ammunition, with a machine gun ammo, plus a place where the machine gunner is trampling) was placed, the mind is inextensible.
    In theory, it is possible to design something similar for two-axle KAMAZ and Ural trucks. With a weight of 7-8 tons, you can get good protection and a place for 7-9 troops + DBM.
  5. +8
    15 July 2022 12: 00

    God forbid to run into a mine. They simply won’t find a fighter there, they’ll just smear him across the interior
  6. 0
    15 July 2022 12: 07
    This is not a modular failure, but a banal "cut". The Zhytomyr plant has always been engaged in the repair of armored vehicles, and not in the development and production. Yes, and the GAZ chassis - 66, as a base - just nonsense. Shishiga was good precisely because it is very light.
    1. +4
      15 July 2022 14: 00
      well, we also had a project for a modular armored car, GAZ-3937 "Vodnik" ...
      1. +1
        15 July 2022 17: 02
        By the way, they flashed in the Donbass in 2014.
      2. 0
        15 July 2022 17: 29
        Also based on "shishiga", 50 years old?
        1. 0
          15 July 2022 18: 43
          Quote: TermNachTER
          Also based on "shishiga", 50 years old?

          no, made with a backlog of chaos. But it looks better than "OVOD"
          Here is an article about him:

          1. 0
            15 July 2022 21: 00
            A mess - it was a perfectly suitable machine, it would have had a diesel engine of suitable power, in general a fairy tale.
  7. 0
    15 July 2022 17: 44
    It was argued that the driving characteristics of the armored car remained at the level of the base vehicle with a payload. Whether this is true is unknown. The shown test footage or recent video from city streets does not allow for an assessment of such parameters.

    What I liked the most about this article. Not allowed to rate, ehana! Well, ek-makarek, even I am a miserable, unworthy, worthless nonentity who does not have a physics and mathematics degree, engineering design or at least a primitive techie "crust" - simply by comparing the geometry, clearance and overhang angles of this stuffed animal and "shishiga", clearly I see that where the "shishiga" will pass (even if not lightly, let it be tight, but it will pass), this miracle of hostile technology will row the mud with its belly / stick its muzzle into the ledge / yes, it will simply splay into a thrust long before that! I hope it just burns somewhere in the parking lot quietly peacefully without people inside.
    1. +1
      15 July 2022 19: 36
      Well, the Ukrainians, you see, decided to fight on the asphalt
  8. +1
    15 July 2022 19: 02
    And also, in 2015, in Ukraine they produced BMRLB (Armored Reconnaissance Vehicle Lightly Armored), Character.,, I didn’t see pictures on the Internet, but my friends sent me. Ukrainians took Volkswagen Caddy-type heels, sheathed them with ,,,, nano-armor .... 2mm iron, fine-meshed grating, reinforced rubber, 2mm iron. They made a tower in the back ... they cut a hole and put a pair of Maxims
  9. 0
    16 July 2022 00: 21
    And what, it’s quite a convenient car for trips to rob the population ..
  10. 0
    16 July 2022 00: 53
    They took a truck, armored the cab and body, stuffed a heavy machine gun .. Now, if you would report that all the copies burned to hell, I would be glad. And "he's ugly" doesn't sound like peer review or encouraging news.
    BTR 80 and BMP 1 are also not the crowning achievement of design, but the fewer of them the enemy has, the better.
  11. +1
    16 July 2022 09: 59
    There are a lot of MTLBs from storage. They will be better than this craft.
  12. +1
    16 July 2022 10: 01
    It was necessary to do on the basis of KRAZ, if so hunting.
  13. +1
    16 July 2022 20: 06
    An ideal piece for a museum.
  14. 0
    16 July 2022 22: 38
    So. Stop it, that's all.
    Great car, worthy of being released in a large series.
    Ergonomics, weapons and armor in general AGON!
    There is an opinion to replace the BTR-80,90 with this masterpiece.
    They were invented by insidious mokshas so that more garnih lads would perish.
    But this prodigy for all time.
  15. +1
    17 July 2022 16: 55

    is there something similar?
    BTR Vodnik
    If they added a third axle, it turned out well, not a bad simple armored personnel carrier, at least better than simple trucks hung with sandbags and with armor in the doors ...
    The GAZ-39371 car has the following layout: a control compartment (three seats), an engine compartment and a fighting compartment. The car was built in a modular way. The welded car body consisted of two modules - front and rear, which were removable. Thanks to the quick-release connection of the base flange of the housing and the rear module, it was possible to quickly replace it even in normal field conditions. The body of the Vodnik, depending on the tasks to be solved, could be made of armored steel, which guaranteed the protection of the vehicle crew from 7,62 mm caliber bullets and shrapnel. In addition, to increase the level of protection, it was possible to install additional hinged body armor on the car.
  16. 0
    18 July 2022 22: 22
    As in the song: "I blinded him from what was ...".
  17. 0
    22 July 2022 17: 29
    As for me, it was possible not to bother much, but simply to sheathe the shishiga with armor - the cabin and the kung, it would have turned out much more presentable.
  18. 0
    3 October 2022 02: 58
    Underestimating the enemy always leads to bad consequences...