BMD-2 with new weapons and protection

The BMD-2 in a new look. Photo by Rostec.

Russian industry continues to modernize existing armored vehicles. Recently, another batch of BMD-2 airborne combat vehicles with a redesigned armament system and enhanced protection was delivered to the troops. In manufacturer publications, this version is referred to as the BMD-2M with the "Bereg" fighting compartment (hereinafter referred to as the BMD-2M ("Bereg"), to distinguish it from the earlier modification of the same name from the early 2010s). According to the manufacturer, these measures improve the vehicle's firepower and survivability. However, this approach has a downside that deserves special attention.

Latest news

On May 29, 2026, the High Precision Systems holding company of the Rostec state corporation announced the delivery of a batch of modernized BMD-2M (Bereg) with additional protection and integrated means to the Russian Ministry of Defense. EWThe size of the batch is not disclosed.

Previously, this equipment was assigned to combat units and was transferred to industry for further work. The vehicles underwent a major overhaul, restoring their service life, and received a new set of components.

According to the holding company, the modernization project is based on accumulated experience in combat use of armored vehicles: it includes enhanced protection and the replacement of the standard fighting compartment with a new "Bereg" module. It's important not to confuse the current version with the early BMD-2M from 2010–2012—the one whose main change was the replacement of the stabilizer and the addition of an external ATGM launcher on the standard turret. The current project is a fundamentally different step, replacing the entire fighting compartment.

Rostec notes that the modernized BMD retains the ability to combat a wide range of targets—armored vehicles, including Tanks, as well as fortifications. According to the developer, this increases the effective firing range and improves protection.

Apparently, this concerns the first batch; deliveries to the airborne troops will continue.

Modern development

The idea of ​​radically enhancing the BMD-2's firepower was already being explored at the beginning of the last decade: between 2010 and 2012, a simplified version, designated BMD-2M, was developed, featuring a replaced stabilizer and an external ATGM launcher. The specialized lightweight "Bereg" fighting compartment, developed by the Tula KBP Design Bureau, became a complete project towards the end of the 2010s. In 2019, prototypes of vehicles with this module underwent preliminary testing.

Hulls for the modernized BMD-2s in the manufacturer's workshop. Autumn 2025. Photo courtesy of the Volgograd Regional Duma.

In 2023–2024, after studying the experience of a special military operation, the project was finalized. No later than 2025, enterprises began serial production of the updated version—the results of which became the subject of recent News.

The current design retains the BMD-2's key components and assemblies while overhauling the hull and chassis. The standard fighting compartment is replaced with the "Bereg" (Bereg) system, and a suite of additional protection is added.

New weapons

In its basic configuration, the BMD-2 is equipped with a one-man turret with cannon and machine gun armament. The main weapon — A 30mm 2A42 automatic cannon, paired with a 7,62mm PKT machine gun. Fire control is accomplished using several types of sights. The barrel armament can be supplemented by a 9K111 Fagot or 9K111-1 Konkurs ATGM with an open launcher on the turret roof.

The new design utilizes the "Bereg" fighting compartment. It is built around an armored dome that protects against bullets and shrapnel, with a single gunner/operator station. The existing oscillating turret mount, featuring a 2A42 cannon and a coaxial machine gun (PKTM in the new configuration), has been retained.

"Bereg" received a regular rocket Armament: a Kornet ATGM launcher with two missiles ready for launch is mounted on the right side of the turret.

The combat module is equipped with a full-fledged fire control system. Some of its instruments are inherited from the Berezhok module, already in use by the Russian army. The fire control system includes a primary sight in a separate housing on the turret roof, an automatic target tracker, a ballistic computer, and a two-plane stabilizer.

It's worth noting that the Bereg is a lightweight version of the Berezhok module developed for the BMP-2: it has halved the number of ready-to-fire Kornet missiles (two instead of four) and eliminates the 30mm AG-30M automatic grenade launcher. This allowed the module to fit within the weight and size constraints of the light chassis of the amphibious assault vehicle.

The combination of barrel and missile armament allows for the attack of manpower, light armored vehicles, tanks, and fortifications. The stated effective firing ranges are:

• PKTM machine gun (for manpower and unprotected equipment) - 1,5 km;
  
• 2A42 gun - up to 3,5–4 km;
  
• The Kornet ATGM system has a standard range of 5,5 km for the 9M133-1 missile; up to 8–10 km when using extended-range missiles (9M133M-2 – against armored vehicles, 9M133FM-3 – high-explosive fragmentation) from the Kornet-D/Kornet-EM system.
  

Additional protection

The BMD-2's armored hull is made of aluminum alloys and protects against bullets and shrapnel. This type of armor has well-known limitations: low resistance to shaped-charge munitions and high sensitivity to mine blasts. Modern threats have necessitated the introduction of additional protective measures, which have significantly altered the vehicle's appearance.

A BMD-2 in its original configuration. Photo by the Russian Ministry of Defense.

During the modernization, the front and sides of the hull received additional armor plates, installed with a gap below the surface—a spaced armor design. The roof is covered with add-on plates, and the front and side projections are equipped with lattice armor. A distinctive protective "visor"—a tall frame made of metal profile with mesh—was mounted on the fighting compartment of the "Bereg." Jamming stations are mounted on top, at the maximum accessible height.

According to the developers, these tools should disrupt attacks drones enemy, and if the UAV does get close, it should be stopped by grilles and add-on armor. These same elements are designed to counter shaped charge munitions from grenade launchers and anti-tank guided missiles.

It's important to consider the limitations of such protection. Electronic warfare stations are effective against UAVs with a radio control channel, but against FPV-drones Electronic countermeasures are practically ineffective over fiber optics—the only defense left to counter them is physical protection (which, however, also has its vulnerabilities—cable breaks, weather, operator error). The mounted screens and grilles partially compensate for the vulnerabilities of the aluminum hull, but they don't transform the BMD-2 into a fully-fledged heavy assault vehicle—it's still a light airborne vehicle with a fundamentally limited weight capacity.

Compromise and its price

The BMD-2 entered service with the Soviet Airborne Forces in 1985 and no longer meets all modern requirements. However, the Russian army still has a significant fleet of these vehicles: according to estimates by relevant think tanks (including the IISS), the total number of BMD-2s in active units and at storage bases for the Russian Airborne Forces ranges from several hundred to approximately one thousand. Completely abandoning this fleet would be wasteful.

The modernization of the BMD-2 is a cost-effective alternative and temporary supplement to the procurement of the more advanced, but also more expensive, BMD-4M. This step allows for a massive increase in the firepower of the existing fleet while the industry ramps up production of new vehicles.

The positive effects of the modernization are obvious: the engagement range and protection against some threats do increase. However, the solution also has a downside. Add-on armor, grilles, and a protective "visor" inevitably increase the combat weight, which reduces the vehicle's power-to-weight ratio, impairs dynamics, and places strain on the chassis. Experts estimate that both the amphibious capabilities and the ability to parachute using standard equipment without first removing the additional armor are partially or completely lost. Rostec does not officially comment on these parameters in the current configuration. For an airborne combat vehicle, this is a fundamental limitation, effectively changing its operational tactics.

According to publicly available information, the program's serial launch has been delayed for several years. The main reasons cited include state defense procurement priorities favoring the production of entirely new platforms and the lengthy technical refinement of the combat module to meet Airborne Forces requirements.

Ultimately, the BMD-2M (Bereg) is a reasonable temporary compromise, but not a replacement for a full-fledged upgrade of the Airborne Forces fleet.

Comments

[Vladimir_2U]

This is some kind of profanation. On par with a bulletproof vest with a cleavage.
If it is impossible to ensure the possibility of parachute landing, then at least provide reasonable cover with a barbecue.
In my opinion, this kind of "modernization" is being promoted by outright enemies...

[SmolH2]

Is the photo of the grill fully assembled? Or is it designed to fit somewhere for transport?
It is not entirely clear where they will be used, perhaps in the next conflict, when the Airborne Forces will already be provided with anti-drone cover.

[Vladimir_2U]

Quote: SmollH2

Is the photo of the grill fully assembled? Or is it designed to fit somewhere for transport?

The side panels make it clear they're completely covered. And what do you mean, "somewhere"? The entire upper portion of the body can be covered without any concern for the overall dimensions. But no, they've raised it to a tremendous height, which is also a critical parameter, like some kind of Mad Hatter's ugly top hat.

[SmolH2]

Well, I don't argue with that. And in fact, I think so too. So either the engineers are clumsy, or the Bolivar can't carry two people. I'm not aware of the suspension's capabilities.
Still, two missiles is a serious proposition, plus a 30mm AG-30 grenade launcher. That's a big step. And how to use them, and whether to weld on additional mesh or dreadlocks, will be decided locally, as always.

[parma]

The question remains about crew and troops embarkation/disembarkation, plus the ability to fire all standard weapons (by the way, reread the article carefully; it's "shore" and not "shore"; the automatic grenade launcher has been removed). The customer has requirements, and the additional protection must meet them. The regulations state that the troops are inside, meaning they must move inside. How it actually works is not the manufacturer's concern.
Regarding the vehicle itself, even without taking into account today's FPV realities (this is still a feature of the SVO, in other places it is still a local toy and may remain so), the modernization is 20 years late... When the "Berezhok" first appeared in the early 00s, it was a very good modernization for the "old lady" BMP-2, allowing it to at least somehow catch up with Western vehicles in terms of equipment (I'm talking about thermal imagers, stabilizers, etc.) while they are developing something new...

[Prussak25]

It's a strange design, of course. But what does it protect against, and most importantly, what does it protect against? The main kill zones are exposed. The measures taken don't protect the BMD and crew from drone strikes. Yes, they can protect against airdrops, but not from all of them. From any kind of VOG, but not from the FPVs currently in use. The vehicle's main weak points remain exposed. I served on this type of BMD and know it, as they say, not from rumors and pictures.

[Vladimir_2U]

Quote: Prussak25

Yes, they can protect against discharges. But not from all of them.

The hull is also barely protected from air strikes, neither the bow nor the stern. Only the turret.

[Prussak25]

That's the whole point. The armor there is so-so. Totally worthless. In the good old days, that would have been considered sabotage.

[SmolH2]

Of course, I'm not using a grenade launcher, out of habit, even though I read the article. But without repair battalions to hang nets, it's all down to the first drone.

[alexoff]

Yes, they can protect against discharges.

Most likely, the technical specifications were developed when there were just discharges. Well, they launched it into production in 2026, a bit late...

[Mikhail3]

Parachute drops aren't even funny. They don't even use parachute drops anymore, let alone BMDs. The "Krikun" broadband jammer is at least something, so be thankful for that. Spaced armor—we need an expert's opinion on shaped charges here. How effective is that against existing attack weapons?
The main question is: what place will this vehicle occupy in real modern combat? What exactly will its weapons be used against? Considering that carrying troops inside it now means killing people for no apparent reason...

[Owl]

In combat situations, equipment is expendable, while people are not. While BMDs are used on a limited basis (for transporting personnel, for reinforcing defensive positions from shelters), any standard enhancement of protection serves to save the lives of military personnel.

[Rooivalk]

Another money grab!!!

[Cympak]

This modification of the BMD-2 is another stone on the scale of the need for reform of the Airborne Forces.
What to do:
1. Divide the Airborne Forces into airborne and airmobile/airborne assault units.
2. The number of airborne units must correspond to the capabilities of military transport aviation and new tactics of use, taking into account the realities of modern warfare and the capabilities of enemy air defense.
3. Equipment for airborne units must be more compact (to allow more vehicles to be loaded onto military transport vehicles or airlifted by helicopters). To achieve this, airborne infantry fighting vehicles (BMDs) should replace combat remote-controlled platforms (RCPs), and the number of armored personnel carriers (APCs) and other vehicles (including robotic ones) for transporting paratroopers, weapons, and cargo should be increased in the Joint Staff. Overall, these units should be equipped with robotic platforms as much as possible.
4. The backbone should be airmobile units that retain the capability to transport military equipment, but deploy by airborne means, with appropriate equipment: more balanced, protected, and without parachute quirks. For example, instead of the BMD-4M, use the BMP-3 and vehicles based on it. In the USSR, these were called airborne assault units. These units should also be equipped with robotic platforms, which should provide them with firepower in a compact and lightweight configuration, allowing them to deploy a significant strike force using the limited capabilities of air power.
The Americans, by the way, took a similar path when reforming their Marine Corps.

[Alexey RA]

Quote: Cympak

2. The number of airborne units must correspond to the capabilities of military transport aviation and new tactics of use, taking into account the realities of modern warfare and the capabilities of enemy air defense.

That is, the parachute component of the Airborne Forces can be safely reduced to zero.
Seriously speaking, a parachute battalion for a division is quite enough - our military transport aviation cannot land more (if we land as a whole, with equipment and logistics), and the Air Force cannot support the landing.

Quote: Cympak

4. The backbone should be airmobile units that retain the ability to transport military equipment, but are deployed by air, with appropriate equipment: more balanced, protected, and without parachute quirks.

In fact, airborne assault has been the primary method of deploying our Airborne Forces for the last 60 years. A paradoxical situation has developed: the Airborne Forces are uniformly armed with parachute-droppable systems, but in actual combat situations, they land at the nearest airfield, after which they march to their staging areas by land.

[Dzungar]

For example, instead of the BMD-4M, use the BMP-3 and vehicles based on it

How is the BMP-3 better than the BMD-4M? It has the same armor—it's like cardboard, the same armament... It's probably cheaper, though.

[Monster_Fat]

Am I the only one who thinks what's depicted in the photo in the article's title is, at the very least, a perversion of delusion? Some shack above the turret, albeit with some sort of electronic warfare system (which, as it turns out, doesn't protect against anything modern, especially optical ones), and no protection for the rest of the hull?

[dragon772]

The top perimeter of the hull is completely open. Any cumulative charge and that's it. And protection from discharges is also questionable.

[Dzungar]

What a waste of time! It would have been better to remove these aluminum tanks from the war and donate them to museums, monuments, and the Union of Russian Paratroopers. They would have been more useful.